Structure sensitivity and cluster size convergence for formate adsorption on copper surfaces: A DFT cluster model study
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
The structure sensitivity and cluster size convergence for formate adsorption on the Cu(100), Cu(110) and Cu(111) surfaces have been investigated systematically using density functional theory and the cluster model containing up to 40 Cu atoms. The copper core–valence correlation effect on the adsorbate–surface interaction is examined by using three different basis sets and effective core potentials. The calculated geometries and vibrational frequencies are in good agreement with experimental data even on the small clusters and are not surface sensitive. However, the adsorption energies show strong dependence on the surface structure and the cluster size. The adsorption energies are shown to converge very well for the large clusters, and the activity of the Cu planes for formate adsorption is in the order of Cu(110)>Cu(100)>Cu(111), the same as that observed experimentally for methanol synthesis. Regardless of the basis set, cluster size and surface structure, all results show an anionic formate adsorption species. The chemisorption mechanism and the local structure of formate on the three copper surfaces are essentially very similar. Some discussion about cluster modeling is presented.
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