Ultra-High Oxidation Resistance of Suspended Single-Wall Carbon Nanotube Bundles Grown by an "All-Laser" Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Single-wall carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) were laterally grown on SiO2/Si substrates by means of an "all-laser" growth process. Our "all-laser" process stands out by its exclusive use of the same pulsed UV laser, first, to deposit the CoNi nanocatalyst and, second, to grow SWCNTs through the laser ablation of a pure graphite target. The "all-laser" grown SWCNTs generally self-assemble into bundles (5-15 nm-diam.) sprouting from the CoNi nanocatalyst and laterally bridging the 2 microm gap separating adjacent catalysed electrodes (in either "suspended" or "on-substrate" geometries). A comparative study of the oxidation resistance of both suspended and on-substrate SWCNTs was achieved. The "all-laser" grown SWCNTs were subjected to annealing under flowing oxygen at temperatures ranging from 200 to 1100 degrees C. Systematic scanning electron microscopy observations combined with micro-Raman analyses revealed that more than 20% of suspended nanotubes were still stable at temperatures as high as 900 degrees C under flowing O2 while the on-substrate counterpart were completely burnt out at this temperature. Accordingly, the activation energy, as deduced from the Arrhenius plot, of the suspended SWCNTs is found to be as high as approximately 180 kJ mol(-1) (approximately 9 times higher than that of the on-substrate ones). The high quality (almost defect-free) of the nanotubes synthesized by the "all-laser" approach, their protected tips into the embedded CoNi catalyst nanolayer together with their suspended geometry are thought to be responsible for their unprecedented ultra-high oxidation resistance. This opens up new prospects for the use of these suspended nanotubes into nanodevices that have to operate under highly oxidizing environments.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".