Size-Selected Synthesis of PtRu Nano-Catalysts: Reaction and Size Control Mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A rapid synthesis method for the preparation of PtRu colloids and their subsequent deposition on high surface area carbons is presented. The reaction mechanism is shown to involve the oxidation of the solvent, ethylene glycol, to mainly glycolic acid or, depending on the pH, its anion, glycolate, while the Pt(+IV) and Ru(+III) precursor salts are reduced. Glycolate acts as a stabilizer for the PtRu colloids and the glycolate concentration, and hence the size of the resulting noble metal colloids is controlled via the pH of the synthesis solution. Carbon-supported PtRu catalysts of controlled size can be prepared within the range of 0.7-4 nm. Slow scan X-ray diffraction and high-resolution transmission electron microscopy show the PtRu catalysts to be crystalline. The Ru is partly dissolved in the face-centered cubic Pt lattice, but the catalysts also consist of a separate, hexagonal Ru phase. The PtRu catalysts appear to be of the same composition independent of the catalyst size in the range of 1.2-4 nm. Particular PtRu catalysts prepared in this work display enhanced activities for the CH(3)OH electro-oxidation reaction when compared to two commercial catalysts.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".