Synthesis and Characterization of Carbon-Doped TiO<sub>2</sub> Nanostructures with Enhanced Visible Light Response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carbon-doped TiO 2 micro-/nanospheres and nanotubes have been synthesized via a single source chemical vapor deposition in an inert atmosphere. Organic compound Ti(OC 4 H 9 ) 4 was used as the titanium, oxygen, and carbon source, while argon served as the carrier gas. The effect of the temperature, substrate, and the flow rate of the carrier gas is investigated. The diameter of the formed carbon-doped TiO 2 spheres can be adjusted from 100 nm to several micrometers by varying the flow rate of the carrier gas. The as-prepared TiO 2 nanotubes are highly ordered with a diameter of about 100 nm and a wall thickness of around 15 nm. The estimated optical band gap is 2.78 eV for the formed carbon-doped TiO 2 microspheres and 2.72 eV for the synthesized carbon-doped TiO 2 nanotubes, both of which are much smaller than that of bulk anatase TiO 2 (3.20 eV). The photocurrent of the carbon-doped TiO 2 spheres is much higher than that of commercial P-25, which is currently considered as one of the best TiO 2 photocatalysts, especially under visible light irradiation. The possible mechanism of the formation of TiO 2 spheres and nanotubes is also discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".