Experimental methods in chemical engineering: X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy‐XPS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) is a quantitative surface analysis technique used to identify the elemental composition, empirical formula, chemical state, and electronic state of an element. The kinetic energy of the electrons escaping from the material surface irradiated by an x‐ray beam produces a spectrum. XPS identifies chemical species and quantifies their content and the interactions between surface species. It is minimally destructive and is sensitive to a depth between 1–10nm. The elemental sensitivity is in the order of 0.1 atomic %. It requires ultra high vacuum ( Pa) in the analysis chamber and measurement time varies from minutes to hours per sample depending on the analyte. XPS dates back 50 years ago. New spectrometers, detectors, and variable size photon beams, reduce analysis time and increase spatial resolution. An XPS bibliometric map of the 10 000 articles indexed by Web of Science[1] identifies five research clusters: (i) nanoparticles, thin films, and surfaces; (ii) catalysis, oxidation, reduction, stability, and oxides; (iii) nanocomposites, graphene, graphite, and electro‐chemistry; (iv) photocatalysis, water, visible light, and ; and (v) adsorption, aqueous solutions, and waste water.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.044 | 0.026 |
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".