Zn/ZnO/TiO2 and Al/Al2O3/TiO2 Photocatalysts for the Degradation of Cypermethrin
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 aim of the present study is to investigate the activity of semiconductor materials on the degradation of pesticides cypermethrin under UV-light (6 W, ? = 354 nm). Three types of photocatalysts were prepared namely Zn/ZnO, Zn/ZnO/TiO2 and Al/Al2O3/TiO2. Zn/ZnO film was prepared by anodic oxidation of zinc in NaOH with various concentrations (0.2, 0.3, 0.4, and 0.5 M) at 12 V for 20 minutes. The best concentration for NaOH is 0.5 M and the best applied voltage in the preparation of Zn/ZnO is 12 V. The Al/Al2O3 film was prepared by anodizing aluminium plate in H2SO4 at 12 V for 60 minutes. TiO2 films were electrodeposited onto Zn/ZnO and Al/Al2O3 by electrolysis technique in (NH4)2[TiO(C2O4)] solution at 12 V for 20 minutes. Zn/ZnO/TiO2/UV shows the highest photocatalytic degradation of cypermethrin compared to the other photocatalytic system. The effects of some operational parameters such as pH and oxidizing agent (H2O2) on the degradation efficiency of the semiconductor were also studied. The optimum pH for the photodegradation of cypermethrin using Zn/ZnO is pH 5. In the presence of H2O2 as the oxidizing agent, the overall reaction is significantly reduced due the scavenging effect of H2O2. The surface morphology of the catalyst was studied by FESEM analysis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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