Metallic Nanoparticle−Carbon Nanotube Composites for Electrochemical Determination of Explosive Nitroaromatic Compounds
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metal nanoparticles (Pt, Au, or Cu) together with multiwalled and single-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT and SWCNT) solubilized in Nafion have been used to form nanocomposites for electrochemical detection of trinitrotoluene (TNT) and several other nitroaromatics. Electrochemical and surface characterization by cyclic voltammetry, AFM, TEM, SEM, and Raman spectroscopy confirmed the presence of metal nanoparticles on CNTs. Among various combinations tested, the most synergistic signal effect was observed for the nanocomposite modified glassy carbon electrode (GC) containing Cu nanoparticles and SWCNT solubilized in Nafion. This combination provided the best sensitivity for detecting TNT and other nitroaromatic compounds. Adsorptive stripping voltammetry for TNT resulted in a detection limit of 1 ppb, with linearity up to 3 orders of magnitude. Selectivity toward the number and position of the nitro groups in different nitroaromatics was very reproducible and distinct. Reproducibility of the TNT signal was within 7% (n = 8) from one electrode preparation to another, and the response signal was stable (+/-3.8% at 95% confidence interval) for 40 repeated analyses with 10 min of preconditioning. The Cu-SWCNT-modified GC electrode was demonstrated for analysis of TNT in tap water, river water, and contaminated soil.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it