MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210348027 · doi:10.1038/s41467-022-28405-6

Identification of CO2 adsorption sites on MgO nanosheets by solid-state nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy

2022· article· en· W4210348027 on OpenAlexaff
Jia‐Huan Du, Lu Chen, Bing Zhang, Kuizhi Chen, Meng Wang, Yang Wang, Ivan Hung, Zhehong Gan, Xin‐Ping Wu, Xue‐Qing Gong, Luming Peng

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
FundersDivision of Materials ResearchEast China University of Science and TechnologyHigh Magnetic Field Laboratory, Chinese Academy of SciencesNewton FundNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational High Magnetic Field LaboratoryRoyal SocietyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAdsorptionNanomaterialsSpectroscopySolid-stateMaterials scienceSolid-state nuclear magnetic resonanceIdentification (biology)NanotechnologySolid surfaceNuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyChemistryNuclear magnetic resonanceChemical physicsPhysical chemistryPhysicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The detailed information on the surface structure and binding sites of oxide nanomaterials is crucial to understand the adsorption and catalytic processes and thus the key to develop better materials for related applications. However, experimental methods to reveal this information remain scarce. Here we show that 17O solid-state nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy can be used to identify specific surface sites active for CO2 adsorption on MgO nanosheets. Two 3-coordinated bare surface oxygen sites, resonating at 39 and 42 ppm, are observed, but only the latter is involved in CO2 adsorption. Double resonance NMR and density functional theory (DFT) calculations results prove that the difference between the two species is the close proximity to H, and CO2 does not bind to the oxygen ions with a shorter O···H distance of approx. 3.0 Å. Extensions of this approach to explore adsorption processes on other oxide materials can be readily envisaged.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations48
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicAtomic and Subatomic Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207