MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054999651 · doi:10.1021/ie9017034

Photocatalytic Thermodynamic Efficiency Factors. Practical Limits in Photocatalytic Reactors

2010· article· en· W2054999651 on OpenAlexaff
Benito Serrano, Aarón Ortíz, Jesús Moreira, Hugo de Lasa

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicTiO2 Photocatalysis and Solar Cells
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotocatalysisRadicalChemistryPhenolPhotochemistryInorganic ionsIonOrganic chemistryCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The photocatalytic thermodynamic efficiency factor (PTEF) is a parameter that can be used in photocatalytic reactors to establish photon energy utilization as the ratio of the energy used to generate OH • free radicals and the energy absorbed by the TiO 2 photocatalyst. The PTEF evaluation requires the assessment of the total rate of OH • free radicals at any given time during the photoconversion of organic species. A key parameter in this assessment is the availability of the complete spectrum of measurable chemical species including various intermediates. Quantification of different chemical species and their evolution with irradiation time allow via stoichiometric relationships the calculation of the OH • radicals consumed in the photocatalytic reactor. PTEFs and quantum yields (QY) were reported recently for phenol photocatalytic conversion in water media (free of iron ions) displaying 71% and 19% maximum QYs and PTEFs, respectively. 19 In the present study, the QY and PTEF are reviewed further, considering the photoconversion of phenol in water media enhanced by iron ions. It is shown using the more realistic RN2 model that the maximum QYs and PTEFs reach up to 85% and 23% levels, respectively. These encouraging efficiency factors demonstrate the favorable prospects of photocatalysis and Photo-CREC Water reactors operated under optimum photocatalyst loading conditions (0.14 g/L), with only a small fraction of the total absorbed photons potentially lost in photon recombination.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations27
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchSame topicTiO2 Photocatalysis and Solar CellsFrench-language works237,207