Photocatalytic Activity of a Multicomponent System Assembled within Zeolites: Case of 2,4,6-Triphenylpyrylium or Ruthenium Tris(bipyridyl) Photosensitizers and Titanium Dioxide Relays within Zeolite Y
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Samples of zeolite Y containing 2,4,6-triphenylpyrylium or tris(bipyridyl)ruthenium(II) have been prepared and their photophysical and photochemical properties compared to those of the same samples containing encapsulated nanoscopic TiO 2 clusters as relays. The emission of encapsulated Ru(bpy) 3 2+ and TP + photolumophores undergoes static quenching in the presence of codoped TiO 2 clusters. This is the expected behavior for systems, where photosensitizer and relay lack diffusional mobility. Time-resolved diffuse reflectance laser flash photolysis shows the transient generation of TP • pyranyl radical and Ru(bpy) 3 3+, upon irradiation of TP + and Ru(bpy) 3 2+ in the presence of TiO 2, respectively. This provides firm support for the occurrence of photoinduced electron transfer between excited TP + as acceptor and TiO 2 clusters as donors and from Ru(bpy) 3 2+ to the conduction band of TiO 2 . Using the photoinactivation of horseradish peroxidase as a test reaction in aqueous medium, a synergism has been found with respect to the activity of Ru(bpy) 3 2+ or TP + photocatalysts when incorporated inside the supercages of zeolite Y in the presence of TiO 2 nanoclusters.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".