Photocatalytic Degradation of 1,10-Dichlorodecane in Aqueous Suspensions of TiO<sub>2</sub>: A Reaction of Adsorbed Chlorinated Alkane with Surface Hydroxyl Radicals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1,10-Dichlorodecane (D 2 C 10 ) is shown to be effectively photodegraded in aqueous suspensions of TiO 2 using a photoreactor equipped with 300 nm lamps. Solutions exposed to UV light intensities of 3.6 × 10 - 5 Ein L - 1 min - 1, established by ferrioxalate actinometry, showed negligible direct photolysis in the absence of TiO 2 . The degradation rate was optimal with 150 mg/L of TiO 2 and a D 2 C 10 concentration (240 μg/L) approaching its solubility limit. Kinetics of photodegradation followed a Langmuir−Hinshelwood model suggesting that the reaction occurred on the surface of the photocatalyst. The presence of h + vb and OH • radical scavengers, including methanol and iodide, inhibited the degradation supporting a photooxidation reaction. Electron scavengers (Ag +, Cu 2+, and Fe 3+ ) had small effects on the degradation rate. The lack of transformation of D 2 C 10 in acetonitrile as solvent indicated that the major oxidants were OH • radicals. The presence of tetranitromethane, effectively eliminating the formation of free OH • radicals, did not affect the degradation rates significantly. This result, combined with observed increases in photolysis rates with the degree of adsorption of D 2 C 10 onto the surface of the photocatalyst, confirmed that the reaction involved adsorbed 1,10-dichlorodecane and surface bound OH • radicals.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".