Interfacial Interaction of Titania Nanoparticles and Ligated Uranyl Species: A Relativistic DFT Investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To understand interfacial behavior of actinides adsorbed onto mineral surfaces and unravel their structure–property relationship, the structures, electronic properties, and energetics of various ligated uranyl species adsorbed onto TiO 2 surface nanoparticle clusters (SNCs) were examined using relativistic density functional theory. Rutile (110) and anatase (101) titania surfaces, experimentally known to be stable, were fully optimized. For the former, models studied include clean and water-free Ti 27 O 64 H 20 ( dry ), partially hydrated (Ti 27 O 64 H 20 )(H 2 O) 8 ( sol ) and proton-saturated [(Ti 27 O 64 H 20 )(H 2 O) 8 (H) 2 ] 2+ ( sat ), while defect-free and defected anatase SNCs involving more than 38 TiO 2 units were considered. The aquouranyl sorption onto rutile SNCs is energetically preferred, with interaction energies of −8.54, −10.36, and −2.39 eV, respectively. Energy decomposition demonstrates that the sorption is dominated by orbital attractive interactions and modified by steric effects. Greater hydrogen-bonding involvement leads to increased orbital interactions (i.e., more negative energy) from dry to sol/sat complexes, while much larger steric interaction in the sat complex significantly reduces the sorption interaction (i.e., more positive energy). For dry SNC, adsorbates were varied from aquo to aquo-carbonato, to carbonato, to hydroxo uranyl species. Longer U–O surf /U–Ti distances and more positive sorption energies were calculated upon introducing carbonato and hydroxo ligands, indicative of weaker uranyl sorption onto the substrate. This is consistent with experimental observations that the uranyl sorption rate decreases upon raising solution pH value or adding carbon dioxide. Anatase SNCs adsorbing aquouranyl are even more exothermic, because more bonds are formed than in the case of rutile. Moreover, the anatase sorption can be tuned by surface defects as well as its Ti and O stoichiometry. All the aquouranyl–SNC complexes show similar character of molecular orbitals and energetic order although differing in highest occupied molecular orbital (HOMO)–lowest unoccupied molecular orbital (LUMO) gaps and orbital energy levels, but changes can be accomplished by adding carbonato and hydroxo ligands.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".