MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158306971 · doi:10.1002/cjce.24157

<scp> CeO <sub>2</sub> </scp> / <scp> TiO <sub>2</sub> </scp> / <scp> SiO <sub>2</sub> </scp> nanocatalyst for the photocatalytic and sonophotocatalytic degradation of chlorpyrifos

2021· article· en· W3158306971 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Reza Mansourian, Seyedeh Maryam Mousavi, Shahin Alizadeh, Samad Sabbaghi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicAdvanced Photocatalysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotocatalysisPhotodegradationDegradation (telecommunications)Materials scienceChemical engineeringCatalysisTitanium dioxideCerium oxideNuclear chemistryOxideChemistryComposite materialMetallurgyOrganic chemistryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A new nanohybrid photocatalyst named cerium (IV) oxide (CeO 2 )/TiO 2 (titania)/silicon dioxide (SiO 2 ) was firstly synthesized employing the co‐precipitation technique to elaborate the degradation efficiency of chlorpyrifos (CPS) as a relatively indelible organophosphorus pesticide in deionized water in photocatalytic and sonophotocatalytic processes. The influence of various parameters, including photocatalyst dosage, the CPS pesticide concentration, pH, and irradiation time, was investigated, and the optimal parameters for photodegradation and sonophotodegradation were determined. The activity and the electrical energy of this photocatalyst in the photodegradation and sonophotodegradation processes were compared, and it was revealed that the sonophotocatalytic process was superior to the photocatalytic one (about 15%). Results depicted that it can be employed four times for the photocatalytic reactions with the same yield of CPS degradation. Besides, the CPS degradation efficiency at the optimum conditions was found to be 81.1% and 90.8% for the photo‐degradation and sonophotodegradation, respectively. Pursuant to the kinetic studies, the kinetics models that govern these processes are leaner with acceptable accuracy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.197 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations40
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Photocatalysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207