Effect of Chromium Additives to Nanocrystalline Ti:Ru:Fe:O on the Reduction of Hypochlorite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Composite materials made of nanocrystalline Ti:Ru:Fe:O (2:1:1:2) mixed with or were prepared by high-energy ballmilling. These materials were cold-pressed in the form of disk electrodes and used to electrolyze a chlorate electrolyte that does not contain dichromate or chromate ions. The concentration in the electrolyte was measured with respect to the electrolysis time for a variety of composite electrodes prepared by varying the milling time, . In all cases, the decomposition rate, , was calculated from the slope of the vs time curve. In the case of nanocrystalline Ti:Ru:Fe:O mixed with , decreases from as increases from . For , the decomposition rate increases to . In the case of nanocrystalline Ti:Ru:Fe:O mixed with , is only marginally affected for , while it reaches a value as high as after of milling. Through a detailed structural and surface analysis performed by using X-ray diffraction, energy-dispersive X-ray analysis, and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, it is shown that a chromium hydroxide layer is formed at the surface of the electrodes even if the electrolysis is conducted in a chlorate electrolyte that does not contain dichromate or chromate ions. This arises due to dissolution of Cr species in the electrolyte and their redeposition at the electrode surface under cathodic polarization. The reasons underlying the different behavior of composite electrodes made with instead of are discussed.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".