MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335344607 · doi:10.1021/am504084p

Green Synthesis of Anatase TiO<sub>2</sub> Nanocrystals with Diverse Shapes and their Exposed Facets-Dependent Photoredox Activity

2014· article· en· W2335344607 on OpenAlexafffund
Nitish Roy, Yohan Park, Youngku Sohn, K. T. Leung, Debabrata Pradhan

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Applied Materials & Interfaces · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicAdvanced Photocatalysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCouncil of Scientific and Industrial Research, IndiaNational Research Foundation of KoreaDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
KeywordsPhotocatalysisNanorodMaterials scienceAnataseMethyl orangeNanocrystalMethylene blueNanotechnologyPhotochemistryNanocapsulesChemical engineeringRutileCatalysisNanoparticleOrganic chemistryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The exposed facets of a crystal are known to be one of the key factors to its physical, chemical and electronic properties. Herein, we demonstrate the role of amines on the controlled synthesis of TiO2 nanocrystals (NCs) with diverse shapes and different exposed facets. The chemical, physical and electronic properties of the as-synthesized TiO2 NCs were evaluated and their photoredox activity was tested. It was found that the intrinsic photoredox activity of TiO2 NCs can be enhanced by controlling the chemical environment of the surface, i.e.; through morphology evolution. In particular, the rod shape TiO2 NCs with ∼25% of {101} and ∼75% of {100}/{010} exposed facets show 3.7 and 3.1 times higher photocatalytic activity than that of commercial Degussa P25 TiO2 toward the degradation of methyl orange and methylene blue, respectively. The higher activity of the rod shape TiO2 NCs is ascribed to the facetsphilic nature of the photogenerated carriers within the NCs. The photocatalytic activity of TiO2 NCs are found to be in the order of {101}+{100}/{010} (nanorods) > {101}+{001}+{100}/{010} (nanocuboids and nanocapsules) > {101} (nanoellipsoids) > {001} (nanosheets) providing the direct evidence of exposed facets-depended photocatalytic activity.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations112
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Applied Materials & InterfacesSame topicAdvanced Photocatalysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207