Catalytic Consequences of Reactive Intermediates during CO Oxidation on Ag Clusters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kinetic measurements, microkinetic modeling, and CO and O2 uptake experiments lead to a proposed mechanism for CO oxidation on dispersed Ag cluster surfaces. CO turnovers occur via kinetically relevant reactions between O2* and CO* on Ag cluster surfaces nearly saturated with O* and CO*. The operating pressure ratio of O2 to the square of CO, [O2]-to-[CO]2, dictates the relative O* and CO* coverages and in turn the rate coefficients. Low [O2]-to-[CO]2 ratios lead to Ag cluster surfaces saturated with CO*, during which the first-order rate coefficients (rCO[CO]−1) increase linearly with the pressure ratio. As the [O2]-to-[CO]2 ratio increases, the CO* coverages decrease and O* coverages concomitantly increase, and the rate coefficients become independent of the [O2]-to-[CO]2 ratio. CO* binds to Ag clusters more strongly than O*, and as a result, CO* coverages decrease and O* coverages increase as the reaction temperature rises when comparing at a constant [O2]-to-[CO]2 ratio. The rate coefficients for CO oxidation on CO* covered Ag clusters initially increase with increasing Ag cluster diameter to ∼5 nm, but decrease with a further increase in Ag diameter beyond 5 nm. The former trend reflects more weakly bound and reactive O2* and CO*, and the latter likely reflects the depletion of O2* molecules.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".