MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1898970700 · doi:10.1155/2015/612857

Synthesis and Optimization of Visible Light Active BiVO<sub>4</sub>Photocatalysts for the Degradation of RhB

2015· article· en· W1898970700 on OpenAlexafffund
Rong Ran, Joanne Gamage McEvoy, Zisheng Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Photoenergy · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicAdvanced Photocatalysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsAmmonium metavanadateX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyCalcinationVisible spectrumPhotocatalysisMonoclinic crystal systemRhodamine BMaterials scienceScanning electron microscopeDiffuse reflectance infrared fourier transformNuclear chemistryPhotochemistryCatalysisVanadiumChemical engineeringChemistryCrystallographyCrystal structureOrganic chemistryMetallurgyOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monoclinic BiVO 4 powders were synthesized via a novel route using potassium metavanadate (KVO 3 ) prepared by calcination of K 2 CO 3 and V 2 O 5 as a starting material and followed by hydrothermal treatment and were investigated for the degradation of Rhodamine B (RhB) under visible light irradiation. The synthesized BiVO 4 particles were characterized by X-ray diffraction (XRD), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), and UV-Visible (UV-Vis) light diffuse reflectance spectrophotometry. The synthesis produced pure monoclinic BiVO 4 particles with multimorphological features containing flower-like, flake-ball, flake, cuboid-like, and plate-like shapes and exhibited strong absorption in the visible light range. The BiVO 4 prepared via KVO 3 possessed excellent photocatalytic activity for the degradation of RhB under visible light. The performance of this catalyst was found to be superior to other BiVO 4 photocatalysts prepared via ammonium metavanadate (NH 4 VO 3 ) using coprecipitation, combustion, and calcination methods reported in literature, respectively.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.388
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations47
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of PhotoenergySame topicAdvanced Photocatalysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207