MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2739031313 · doi:10.1149/ma2017-02/16/904

Electrodeposition of Metals and Metal Oxides into Nanoporous Gold

2017· article· en· W2739031313 on OpenAlexaff
Ayman A. El‐Zoka, Anatolie G. Carcea, Mahmoud Ghaznavi

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanoporous metals and alloys
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanoporousMaterials scienceNanotechnologyNanostructureFabricationTernary operationDissolutionLayer (electronics)TemplateElectrolyteAlloyMetalChemical engineeringMetallurgyElectrodeChemistryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nanoporous gold (NPG) is usually fabricated by the selective electrolytic dissolution (dealloying) of Ag from a binary Ag-Au alloy, or sometimes from a ternary alloy such as Ag-Au-Pt. The resulting ligament-pore structure is bicontinuous and has an extraordinarily high surface area-to-volume ratio, posing it as a promising candidate for catalyst applications [1-2]. The ligament size can be as small as 3-5 nm. While a lot of recent research has been focusing on the structure/property relationships of NPG as a functional material in its own right [2-5], the further use of NPG as a sophisticated template for fabricating complex nanostructured materials is worthy of attention. Figure 1 - SEM image of FIB (focused ion beam) cross-section showing the dealloyed layer after deposition of Cu. [5] Recent work showing atomic-scale characterization of NPG by electrodeposition of a fully compact Cu support opens the door to implementing that newly developed method to the creation of finely tuned nanostructures using NPG as a template [5]. Fabrication of nanostructures/nanosurfaces pertaining to the interests of the catalysis community will be demonstrated through the electrodeposition of metals, such as Cu and Co, and metal oxides, such as Cr2O3 and MoO2, on NPG. Furthermore, notable characteristics of NPG and the electrodeposition methodology that enables such compact deposits have been investigated experimentally and theoretically through reaction-transport modelling. A key aspect is the use of thin nanoporous layers, such that the characteristic diffusion time through the layer is short, in the ms range, but there are other subtleties. Electron diffraction and X-ray diffraction reveal the crystalline structure and orientation of the deposits and the associated growth mechanism. For metal deposition within a nanoporous material, not only ordinary thermodynamics have to be considered, but also the “subpotential” curvature-driven deposition described by Lee et al. [6]. References [1] R C. Newman, “Dealloying,” in Shreir’s Corrosion (4th ed.), Elsevier, vol. 2, pp. 801–809, 2010. [2] A.A. Vega, and R.C. Newman, “Nanoporous metals fabricated through electrochemical dealloying of Ag-Au-Pt with systematic variation of Au:Pt ratio,” Journal of the Electrochemical Society, vol. 161, pp. 1-10, 2014. [3] M. Yan, T. Jin, Q. Chen, H. E. Ho, T. Fujita, L. Y. Chen, M. Bao, M. W. Chen, N. Asao, and Y. Yamamoto, “Unsupported nanoporous gold catalyst for highly selective hydrogenation of quinolines,” Organic Letters, vol. 15, pp. 1484–1487, 2013. [4] A.A. El-Zoka, J. Howe, R.C. Newman, S. Dogel, M. Reynolds, H. Hosseinkhannazer, and D.D. Perovic, “Understanding the coarsening behaviors of nanoporous gold via in situ heating,” Microscopy and Microanalysis, vol. 22, pp. 1968-1969, 2016. [5] A.A. El-Zoka, B. Langelier, G.A. Botton, and R.C. Newman, “Enhanced analysis of nanoporous gold by atom probe tomography,” Materials Characterization, In Press, Available online 10 March 2017. [6] L. Lee, D. He, A.G. Carcea, and R.C. Newman, “Exploring the reactivity and nanoscale morphology of de-alloyed layers,” Corrosion Science, vol. 49, pp. 72-80, 2007. Figure 1

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 score0.004

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicNanoporous metals and alloysFrench-language works237,207