MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097915206 · doi:10.1002/cjce.21916

Structural, surface and catalytic properties of pure and ZrO<sub>2</sub>‐doped nanosized cobalt‐manganese mixed oxides

2013· article· en· W2097915206 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shaimaa M. Ibrahim, Abdelrahman A. Badawy, G.A. El-Shobaky, Heba A. Mohamed

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCatalytic Processes in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalcinationManganeseCobaltDopantCatalysisMaterials scienceDopingInorganic chemistryPhase (matter)AdsorptionSpecific surface areaChemical engineeringChemistryPhysical chemistryMetallurgyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The role of ZrO2‐doping of CoO–Mn2O3 system on its structural, surface and catalytic properties was studied using XRD, EDX, nitrogen adsorption at −196°C and H2O2‐decomposition at 30–50°C. The results revealed that all solids calcined at 300–500°C consisted of nanosized Co2MnO4 as a major phase together with Co3O4 phase. The surface and bulk compositions of pure and variously doped solids were completely different from each other's. The concentration of surface manganese species was much higher than that of cobalt. The addition of the smallest amount of ZrO2 (0.75 mol%) much increased the surface concentration of manganese species. The increase of calcination temperature of all solids increased progressively the catalytic activity which increased by doping with the smallest amount of ZrO2 then decreased by doping with further amounts of ZrO2 dopant falling to values smaller than that measured for pure sample.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.171 · 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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicCatalytic Processes in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207