MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061138691 · doi:10.1063/1.3690052

Is it effective to harvest visible light by decreasing the band gap of photocatalytic materials?

2012· article· en· W2061138691 on OpenAlexaff
Ning Fu, Xinhu Tang, Dongyang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicTiO2 Photocatalysis and Solar Cells
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisible spectrumMaterials scienceWavelengthOptoelectronicsAbsorption (acoustics)Band gapPhotocatalysisRayElectronWide-bandgap semiconductorOpticsPhotochemistryChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In situ variations in the electron work function and photo-current of TiO2 nanotubes demonstrate that long-wavelength illumination only has a minor effect on the excitation of electrons in the nanotubes after being exposed to short-wavelength light or when the short-wavelength light coexisted, indicating that the solar spectrum may not be utilized as efficiently as expected by extending the absorption spectrum of the photocatalytic material to visible light range with decreased band gaps.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics LettersSame topicTiO2 Photocatalysis and Solar CellsFrench-language works237,207