Theoretical study of the CO, NO, and N<sub>2</sub> adsorptions on Li-decorated graphene and boron-doped graphene
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The adsorption properties of common gas molecules (CO, NO, and N2) on the surface of Li-decorated pristine graphene and Li-decorated boron doped graphene are investigated using density functional theory. The adsorption energy, charge transfer, and density of states of gas molecules on three surfaces have been calculated and discussed, respectively. The results show that Li-decorated pristine graphene has strong interaction with CO and N2. Compared with Li-decorated pristine graphene, Li-decorated boron doped graphene exhibit a comparable adsorption ability of CO and N2. Moreover, Li-decorated boron doped graphene have a more significant adsorption energy to NO than that of Li-decorated pristine graphene because of the chemical interaction of the NO gas molecule. The strong interaction between the NO molecule and substrate (Li-decorated boron doped graphene) induces dramatic changes to the electrical conductivity of Li-decorated boron doped graphene. The results indicate that Li-decorated boron doped graphene would be an excellent candidate for sensing NO gas.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".