Photosensitized Degradation of Dyes in Polyoxometalate Solutions Versus TiO<sub>2</sub> Dispersions under Visible‐Light Irradiation: Mechanistic Implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the photoxidation of a dye (rhodamine-B, RhB) by visible-light irradiation in the presence of a polyoxometalate (12-tungstosilicic acid, H(4)SiW(12)O(40)), and compares it with the analogous process in the presence of TiO(2). The photoreaction processes were examined by UV-visible spectroscopy, fluorescence spectroscopy, high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), liquid chromatography/mass spectral techniques (LC-MS), and total organic carbon (TOC) assays in order to identify the intermediates produced. Formation of oxygen species, such as H(2)O(2) and O(2)*-, was also investigated to clarify the details of the reaction pathway. With the use of SiW(12)O(40)(4-) ions as the photocatalyst, the photoreaction leads mainly to N-dealkylation of the chromophore skeleton. In contrast, cleavage of the whole conjugated chromophore structure predominates in the presence of TiO(2). Strong O(2)*-/HO(2)*- ESR signals were detected in the TiO(2) dispersions, whereas only weak ESR signals for the O(2)*- radical ion were seen in the SiW(12)O(40)(4-) solutions during the irradiation period. Experimental results imply that reduction of O(2) occurs by different pathways in the two photocatalytic systems.
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 | 0.001 | 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".