Inhibition of Copper Deposition by Polyethylene Glycol and Chloride
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A comprehensive model for the effect of polyethylene glycol (PEG) and Cl − on Cu 2 + reduction developed in Part I of this study [ Huerta Garrido and Pritzker , J. Electrochem. Soc. , 156 , D36 (2009) ] is further analyzed in Part II. On the basis of the model, the sharp loss of inhibition at a critical potential during cathodic scans occurs whenever the PEG adsorption density decreases below the minimum amount required to completely cover the electrode. When high additive concentrations are used, the electrode remains completely covered by the inhibiting film throughout the scan and, thus, the current for Cu 2 + reduction rises more gradually with overpotential. Excellent agreement between the computed and measured current-potential curves during both forward and reverse directions of cyclic scans is obtained for each solution investigated in this study. Furthermore, analysis of the model reveals that hysteresis in these cyclic scans occurs whenever the electrode goes from a state where it is completely covered by PEG to one where it is only partially covered during the forward scan.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".