MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613674991 · doi:10.14447/jnmes.v19i2.336

Effect of a Natural Brightener, Daphne gnidium L. on the Quality of Nickel Electroplating from Watts Bath

2016· article· en· W2613674991 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hayet. Belbah, Habiba Amira-Guebailia, Abed Mohamed Affoune, Ilhem Djaghout, Omar Houache, Mahmoud Al-Kindi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of New Materials for Electrochemical Systems · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicElectrochemical Analysis and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNickelElectroplatingCyclic voltammetryGlycerolFormaldehydeNuclear chemistryMaterials scienceChemistryMetallurgyElectrochemistryNanotechnologyElectrodeOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Daphne gnidium L. (DGL), a plant known to be rich source of polyphenols, a naturally occurring class of antioxidants, was tested for its ability to play the role of primary and secondary brighteners for electrodeposition of nickel, as a replacement for synthetic brighteners such as glycerol and formaldehyde. A simple and convenient approach was adapted consisting in adding an accurate amount of powdered leaves of Daphne gnidium L. (DGLP) or Daphne gnidium L. leaves extract (DGLE), to the Watts bath, to play the role of brightening agents. Cyclic voltammetry studies revealed that DGLP could inhibit the reaction of nickel reduction and improve the quality of the deposits as efficiently as glycerol and formaldehyde. SEM analyses showed that the micro-cracks decreased and sometimes disappeared from nickel deposits prepared in the presence of DGLP as a brightener. The results of this study show that DGL can be used satisfactorily, with minimum operations as a brightening agent for nickel electrodeposition. The key idea of direct immersion of DGLP in the Watts bath, aimed to the replacement of synthetic brighteners and the reduction of the overall cost of nickel electrodeposition.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of New Materials for Electrochemical SystemsSame topicElectrochemical Analysis and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207