MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146908700 · doi:10.1149/2.050404jes

The Electrochemical Reactivity of 6.0 wt% Gd-Doped UO<sub>2</sub>in Aqueous Carbonate/Bicarbonate Solutions

2014· article· en· W2146908700 on OpenAlexaff
Mayuri Razdan, David W. Shoesmith

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNuclear Materials and Properties
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryAqueous solutionReactivity (psychology)DissolutionRaman spectroscopyX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyInorganic chemistryElectrochemistryCarbonateDopingBicarbonatePhysical chemistryElectrodeMaterials scienceChemical engineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effect of gadolinium doping on the anodic reactivity of UO 2 in aqueous carbonate solutions has been investigated voltammetrically, potentiostatically, by Raman spectroscopy and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. The mechanism of oxidation/dissolution is the same as on undoped UO 2 and lightly doped SIMFUEL (doped UO 2 ) but the reactivity is significantly reduced. This is attributed to the formation of Gd III -Oxygen vacancy (O V ) clusters which limits the availability of these vacancies required to accommodate excess O 2− during matrix oxidation to U IV 1−2x U V 2x O 2+x . The subsequent reaction of this oxidized surface layer to U VI O 3 .yH 2 O/U VI O 2 (CO 3 ) x (2−2x)+ is also suppressed by Gd-doping. The overall oxidation/alteration (dissolution) reaction appears to be kinetically controlled by the creation of U VI surface species prior to dissolution.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.206
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations21
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Electrochemical SocietySame topicNuclear Materials and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207