MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782769482 · doi:10.1002/ppsc.201700367

Dual Template Engaged Synthesis of Hollow Ball‐in‐Tube Asymmetrical Structured Ceria

2018· article· en· W2782769482 on OpenAlexafffund
Yong Wang, Daowei Gao, Cuncheng Li, Chunsheng Li, Federico Rosei, Dongling Ma, Guozhu Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueParticle & Particle Systems Characterization · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCatalytic Processes in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Shandong ProvinceCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceCatalysisNanorodComposite numberChemical engineeringTemplate method patternNanotechnologyTube (container)Ball (mathematics)NanoparticleBall millDual roleComposite materialCombinatorial chemistryChemistryOrganic chemistryGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Hollow materials with different configurations are of interest due to their unique structural features, which induce interesting properties e.g. catalysis. Here, the synthesis of asymmetrical hollow ball‐in‐tube (HBT) structured CeO2 is reported, which is achieved using a dual template engaged solid–liquid interfacial reaction. In this reaction, the SiO2 sphere (hard template)‐embedded Ce(OH)CO3 nanorod (sacrificial template) composite is first treated with NaOH solution, followed by an acid wash to obtain asymmetrical hollow structured CeO2. Such HBT structured CeO2 is demonstrated to be a good support for Au nanoparticles toward CO oxidation as compared to simple hollow CeO2 nanotubes, leading to significantly increase catalytic activity.

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 score0.002

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueParticle & Particle Systems CharacterizationSame topicCatalytic Processes in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207