Towards Scaling-up Photocatalytic Process for Multiphase Environmental Applications: A Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, we have witnessed a booming development of composites and multi-dopant metal oxides to be employed as novel photocatalysts. Yet the practical application of photocatalysis for environmental purposes is still elusive. Concerns about the unknown fate and toxicity of nanoparticles, unsatisfactory performance in real conditions, mass transfer limitations and durability issues have so far discouraged investments in full-scale applications of photocatalysis. Herein, we provide a critical overview of the main challenges that are limiting large-scale application of photocatalysis in air and water/wastewater purification. We then discuss the main approaches reported in the literature to tackle these shortcomings, such as the design of photocatalytic reactors that retain the photocatalyst, the study of degradation of micropollutants in different water matrices, and the development of gas-phase reactors with optimized contact time and irradiation. Furthermore, we provide a critical analysis of research-practice gaps such as treatment of real water and air samples, degradation of pollutants with actual environmental concentrations, photocatalyst deactivation, and cost and environmental life-cycle assessment.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 it