Mechanisms of Phase Transformations of TiO<sub>2</sub> Nanotubes and Nanorods
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phase transformations of titanium dioxide (TiO 2 ) nanotubes and nanorods at elevated temperatures are studied using molecular dynamics (MD) and replica exchange molecular dynamics (REMD) utilized here in the same way as simulated annealing. In the study, TiO 2 nanotubes with amorphous (amT) and anatase structures (anT) as well as TiO 2 amorphous nanorods (amR) that are amenable to experimental investigation are considered at various temperatures. It is found that amT and amR transform into a rutile rod, while anT transforms into a brookite nanotube. It is demonstrated that transformation of anT starts from TiO 4 and TiO 5 complexes found in the surfaces of the system, in contrast to amT and amR, where initial grains of the new phase may develop throughout the entire system starting from TiO 5 and TiO 6 complexes. The evolution of the number of TiO x ( x = 4, 5, 6, 7) complexes indicates that the transformation of amT and amR occurs almost suddenly relative to the transformation of anT. The initial grains of transformation of amT have a structure close to rutile, while those of anT have brookite features. To our knowledge, we report the first simulations of phase transformations of TiO 2 nanotubes and nanorods where simulations are performed beyond μs.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it