Anodic copper oxide nanowire and nanopore arrays with mixed phase content: synthesis, characterization and optical limiting response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thin films consisting of copper oxide nanowires (NWs) containing a mixture of copper oxide phases were formed by electrochemical anodization in de-ionized water (DI) and methanol based electrolytes. Well-defined arrays of vertical nanopores were obtained via anodization in ethylene glycol (EG)-based electrolytes. Optical absorption spectra revealed the electronic bandgap of the NWs formed in DI and methanol to be 2.50 eV, and that of nanopores formed in EG electrolytes to be 1.94 eV. The nanostructures were found to exhibit p-type conduction through Mott–Schottky analysis. The as-formed nanostructures exhibited two photon photoluminescence with lifetimes ranging between 200 and 1100 ps. They also displayed strong optical limiting in the form of a 25% decrease in optical transmission at 800 nm at a relatively low fluence of 0.1 J cm −2 and an absolute transmittance <50% over the entire range of laser fluence values used in this study. The optical transmittance decreased from 40% at an incident Ti-sapphire laser fluence of 20 mJ cm −2 to ∼9% when the fluence was increased to 700 mJ cm −2 . Furthermore, the damage threshold of 0.7 J cm −2 compares favorably with advanced optical limiting materials such as gold-graphene composites and single-walled carbon nanotube composites even without further optimization of nanoscale morphology to maximize scattering. Therefore the nanostructures of mixed copper oxide films studied in this report are particularly promising as optical limiters for protecting low damage threshold (<1 J cm −2 ) photonic devices and are an important addition to the narrow selection of optical limiting materials that are currently available.
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".