The Formation of Layered Double Hydroxide Phases in the Coprecipitation Syntheses of [Ni0.80Co0.15](1−x)/0.95Alx(OH)2(anionn−)x/n (x = 0–0.2, n = 1, 2)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates the synthesis of [Ni0.80Co0.15](1−x)/0.95Alx(OH)2 (x = 0–0.2) materials by coprecipitation to understand the formation of layered double hydroxide (LDH) phases as influenced by Al content and synthesis route. Two routes were compared: the first method dissolved all the metal reagents into one solution before addition into the reaction vessel, while the second dissolved Al into a separate NaOH solution before simultaneous addition of the Ni/Co and Al solutions into the reaction vessel. The synthesized materials were characterized by Scanning Electron Microscopy, X-ray Diffraction, Inductively Coupled Plasma-Optical Emissions Spectroscopy and Thermogravimetric Analysis to understand the formation of LDH phases as influenced by Al content and synthesis method. It was found that as Al content increased, the amount of LDH phase present increased as well. No significant difference in LDH phase presence was observed for the two synthesis methods, but the morphologies of the particles were different. The method containing all the metals in one solution produced small particles, likely due to the continuous nucleation of Al(OH)3 disrupting particle growth. The method containing the separate Al in NaOH solution matched the morphology of the material with no Al, which is known to form desired large spherical particles under continuously stirring tank reactor synthesis conditions.
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) | 0.000 | 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".