Photo‐induced processes in heterogeneous nanosystems. From photoexcitation to interfacial chemical transformations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article briefly reviews some of our recent work carried out both from an experimental point of view as well as from a theoretical perspective to gain further understanding of the events that take place in Heterogeneous Photocatalysis. Previously, the multitude of reports from our laboratory and from many others looked at the primary photocatalytic events as involving (a) absorption of light, (b) formation of the free (electrons and holes) and/or trapped charge carriers (Ti 3+ and •OH radicals), and (c) reaction of pre‐adsorbed acceptor or donor molecules with the relevant trapped carrier. Our recent work notes that this view is reasonable if the only purpose of photocatalysis is elimination of undesirable environmental pollutants. But when we begin to query how to render a process more efficient, we need to address the primary events following photoexcitation of the photocatalyst, which in most instances has been titanium dioxide (in the anatase form). Owing to the nature of light absorption by TiO 2 we resorted to examining other metal oxides, most of which are dielectric insulators with very large bandgap energies, for example zirconia (ZrO 2 ) and scandia (Sc 2 O 3 ). These dielectrics have provided added information on the photophysical events, many of which are masked by the strong light absorption in titania. Despite some of our recent progress, much remains to be done for a fuller understanding of the events that occur at the surface, which we have often considered to be the greatest and most complex defect in metal oxide particulates.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".