Effect of Phase Junction Structure on the Photocatalytic Performance in Overall Water Splitting: Ga<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> Photocatalyst as an Example
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fabrication of surface phase junctions has proven to be an efficient strategy for the enhancement of photocatalytic activity; however, some questions about these systems are not yet well understood. In this study, the photocatalytic overall water splitting reaction was achieved on photocatalysts with pure and mixed phase compositions of cubic γ-Ga 2 O 3 and monoclinic β-Ga 2 O 3 . All the Ga 2 O 3 photocatalysts can split water stoichiometrically into H 2 and O 2; however, the phase-mixed γ/β-Ga 2 O 3 photocatalyst with a small amount of β phase shows the lowest activity. This is opposite from that of the reported α/β-Ga 2 O 3 system in which the phase-mixed α/β-Ga 2 O 3 photocatalyst with a small amount of β phase shows much higher photocatalytic activity than the individual phases. Much more disordered structure is found between the γ and β phases in the γ/β-Ga 2 O 3 photocatalyst with low content of β phase due to the defective spinel structure of γ phase. Spectroscopic characterization and theoretical calculations indicate that the disordered structure serves as defect and charge recombination centers resulting in the decrease of photocatalytic activity. Based on the analysis of α/β-Ga 2 O 3 and γ/β-Ga 2 O 3 systems, it is proposed that a prerequisite for the formation of phase junction boosting photocatalytic reactions is that the interfacial structure between two phases should not be disordered or defective.
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 | 0.000 | 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".