Fabrication of boron carbonitride (BCN) nanotubes and giant fullerene cages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Boron carbonitride (BCN) nanotubes have been successfully prepared using NH4Cl, KBH4, and ZnBr2 as the reactants at 480 °C for 12 h by a new benzene-thermal approach in a N2 atmosphere. As its by-product, a new form of carbon regular hexagonal nanocages are observed. The samples are characterized by X-ray diffraction (XRD), Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, transmission electron microscopy (TEM), transmission electron diffraction (TED), electron energy loss spectroscopy (EELS), and high-resolution transmission electron microscopy (HRTEM). The prepared nanotubes have uniform outer diameters in the range of 150 to 500 nm and a length of up to several micrometerss. The novel carbon hexagonal nanocages have a typical size ranging from 100 nm to 1.5 µm, which could be the giant fullerene cages of [Formula: see text] (N = 17∼148). So, high fullerenes are observed for the first time. The influences of reaction temperature and ZnBr2 on products and the formation mechanism of BCN nanotubes 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 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".