Study of Nucleation and Growth Mechanism of the Metallic Nanodumbbells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a general nucleation and growth model that can explain the mechanism of the formation of CoPt(3)/Au, FePt/Au, and Pt/Au nanodumbbells. Thus, we found that the nucleation event occurs as a result of reduction of Au(+) ions by partially oxidized surface Pt atoms. In cases when Au(3+) is used as a gold precursor, the surface of seeds should be terminated by ions (e.g., Co(2+), Pb(2+)) that can reduce Au(3+) to Au(+) ions, which can further participate in the nucleation of gold domain. Further growth of gold domain is a result of reduction of both Au(3+) and Au(+) by HDA at the surface of gold nuclei. We explain the different ability of CoPt(3), Pt, and FePt seeds to serve as a nucleation center for the reduction of gold and further growth of dumbbells. We report that the efficiency and reproducibility of the formation of CoPt(3)/Au, FePt/Au, and Pt/Au dumbbells can be optimized by the concentration and oxidation states of the surface ions on metallic nanocrystals used as seeds as well as by the type of the gold precursor.
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 | 0.001 | 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".