MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981369474 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.9b08208

Quantitative Studies of the Coverage Effects on Microkinetic Simulations for NO Oxidation on Pt(111)

2019· article· en· W2981369474 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yunxuan Ding, Yarong Xu, Yihui Song, Chenxi Guo, P. Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCatalytic Processes in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilQueen's UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsComputer scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To advance a reliable microkinetic modeling approach using density functional theory (DFT) energies is of great importance to bridging between experimental results and theoretical calculations, and the current major issue is the coverage effect. In this work, a full microkinetic modeling for NO oxidation using DFT energetics is developed. We show that the calculated turnover frequency (TOF) (0.22 s–1) agrees with the experimental one (∼0.2 s–1) very well, if the coverage effects are properly incorporated. It is found that to include the interactions of adsorbates, namely, (i) O and O, NO and NO (self-interaction), and (ii) O and NO (cross-interaction), is important to obtain accurate kinetic results. Equally important, the interactions between the adsorbates and the transition states of O–O bond breaking and O–NO coupling are also crucial for achieving precise kinetics. We demonstrate that a two-line model can be used to describe accurately both the self and cross adsorbate–adsorbate interactions as well as the coverage effects on the transition states of O2 dissociation and O–NO coupling. The various approximations including Brønsted–Evans–Polanyi (BEP) relations are carefully examined, and the errors involved are quantified. Moreover, a one-line model is tested, which is a simplified approach but gives rise to a good agreement with experimental results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations43
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry CSame topicCatalytic Processes in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207