MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050919280 · doi:10.1021/jp907403b

Preparation of Multiwalled Carbon Nanotube-Supported Nickel Catalysts Using Incipient Wetness Method

2009· article· en· W2050919280 on OpenAlexaff
Pooya Azadi, Ramin Farnood, Emanuel Meier

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry A · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon Nanotubes in Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceThermogravimetric analysisCalcinationCatalysisIncipient wetness impregnationNickelNickel oxideChemical engineeringSulfuric acidBET theoryInorganic chemistryCarbon nanotubeNuclear chemistryChemistryNanotechnologyOrganic chemistryMetallurgySelectivity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a systematic study on preparation of multiwalled carbon nanotube (MWCNT)-supported nickel catalyst is pursued. Functional groups are introduced on the surface of MWCNTs using nitric acid, sulfuric acid, and partial oxidation in air. Nickel oxide nanoparticles are formed on the surface of functionalized multiwalled carbon nanotubes by incipient wetness impregnation of nickel nitrate, followed by calcination in air. The effects of acid type and concentration, acid treatment time, partial oxidation, nickel loading, precursor solvent, and calcination temperature on the size of the nickel nanoparticles and homogeneity of the composite material are evaluated. Characteristics of the Ni/MWCNT catalysts were examined using BET, scanning transmission electron microscopy, X-ray diffraction, thermogravimetric analysis in air and nitrogen, temperature-programmed reduction, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, acid-base titration, and zeta-potential analyzer. Results of this work are useful for formulating CNT-supported nickel catalysts for a wide range of different applications, such as reforming of hydrocarbons, catalytic hydrothermal gasification of biomass, and energy storage.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations69
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry ASame topicCarbon Nanotubes in CompositesFrench-language works237,207