The nature of the copper sulfide film grown on copper in aqueous sulfide and chloride solutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, the properties of copper sulfide films formed both anodically and naturally in deaerated/anoxic aqueous sulfide and chloride solutions were investigated using a series of electrochemical and surface analytical techniques. A combination of cyclic voltammetric, corrosion potential (Ecorr), and cathodic stripping voltammetric experiments showed that the sulfide film growth kinetics and film morphologies were controlled by the supply of SH− from the bulk solution to the copper surface. There was no passive barrier layer observed on the copper surface under either electrochemical or corrosion conditions. The film morphology was dependent on the type and concentration of anions (SH−, Cl−) present in the solution. Scanning electron microscopy on both surfaces and focused ion beam‐cut cross‐sections showed the growth of a thin, but porous, base layer of chalcocite (Cu2S) after short immersion periods (up to 2 hr) and the continuous growth of a much thicker crystalline outer deposit over longer immersion periods (≥36 hr), suggesting a solution species transport‐based film formation process and the formation of an ineffective thin “barrier‐type” layer on copper.
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".