Ag decorated G‐C<sub>3</sub>N<sub>4</sub>/black titanium oxides composite for the destruction of environmental pollutant under solar irradiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research on the synthesis of advanced composite materials is an important area of research on the visible‐active photodegradation of environmental pollutants. Novel hybridized structures of graphitic carbon nitride (g‐C3N4) are synthesized by a facile one‐step in‐situ method. Black titanium oxides, TiO, Ti2O 3, a mixture of TiO + Ti2O3, and a reference material, white TiO2 P25, are used for the synthesis of the hybridized g‐C3N4 and further decorated with Ag nanoparticles. Physicochemical and optical properties of the obtained materials are characterized by various techniques. XRD patterns revealed that the structural regularity of g‐C3N4 and titanium oxide(s) is maintained in the composites. However, the main diffraction peak for g‐C3N4 is prominently shifted to a lower 2‐theta along with a decrease in the intensity, indicating the formation of g‐C3N4 nanosheet heterojunction. Vibrational spectra of the composites showed signature IR peaks for g‐C3N4 and demonstrated an enhancement in the vibrations after modifications, and further supported the XRD results. A distinct red‐shift in the optical spectra of g‐C3N4 upon modifications with black titanium oxide(s) demonstrated an enhanced absorbance of visible light, yet on the contrast white TiO2 P25 showed a blue‐shift. Under the experimental conditions of simulated solar light, pristine g‐C3N4, and its composites g‐C3N4/TiO and g‐C3N4/Ti2O3 showed moderate activity for the photodegradation of an organic pollutant, rhodamine B. Interestingly, a synergistic enhancement in the photoactivity is demonstrated by the g‐C3N4 modified with a mixture of black titanium oxides (g‐C3N4/TiO + Ti2O3). On the other hand, the composite synthesized by a post‐synthesis method is found less effective in photodegradation reaction.
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".