MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2337688916 · doi:10.1149/ma2015-01/40/2135

Titanium Dioxide and Tin Oxide Composite for so<sub>2</sub> Gas Sensors

2015· article· en· W2337688916 on OpenAlexaff
Suresh Mulmi, Venkataraman Thangadurai

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGas Sensing Nanomaterials and Sensors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials sciencePelletsScanning electron microscopeTin dioxideGrain sizeTin oxideThermal stabilityComposite numberAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Titanium dioxideOxideChemical engineeringComposite materialMetallurgyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the synthesis and utilization of semiconducting metal oxide composites of SnO2 and TiO2 composites (ST) to serve as a SO2 sensor for a range of applications including carbon capture and storage (CCS), enhance oil recovery (EOR) etc. ST-series pellets were prepared by conventional solid state synthesis approach (~700 oC in air), where the size of the pellet was ~1 cm in diameter. The chemical and thermal stability was demonstrated by employing scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and powder X-ray diffraction (PXRD). The average grain size of as-prepared ST composites was obtained in few nanometers. The as-prepared ST pellets were tested for the sensing properties of SO2 gas in ppm level. The effect of temperature was studied to optimize the operating temperature using Pt electrodes as current collector by applying a constant external potential (~100 mV). As-prepared ST2575 with 0.25 mol % SnO2 exhibited an excellent sensing properties for SO2 (10-40 ppm) at 450 oC. For the sensing measurements, SO2 gas was diluted in N2 gas by maintaining the total flow rate at 100 sccm. The t 90 (90% of response time) for ST2575 was found to be ~5 mins. The stability of the sensor was satisfactory for gas sensing measurements in optimized conditions.

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 score0.003

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 integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicGas Sensing Nanomaterials and SensorsFrench-language works237,207