TiO2/Au/TiO2 Plasmonic Photocatalysts: The Influence of Titania Matrix and Gold Properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plasmonic photocatalysts have gained more and more attention because of possible applications for solar energy conversion, environmental decontamination, and water treatment. However, the activity under visible light is usually very low, and the property-governed activity as well as the mechanisms are not fully understood yet. Accordingly, this study examines four different titania photocatalysts (anatase and rutile with fine and large crystallites) modified with gold by photodeposition. Three kinds of samples were prepared, as follows: (i) gold-modified titania (Au/TiO2), (ii) physically mixed Au/TiO2 samples (Au/TiO2(1) + Au/TiO2(2)), and (iii) Au/(TiO2(1) + Au/TiO2(2)) samples, prepared by subsequent deposition of gold on the mixture of bare and gold-modified titania. In total, twelve samples were prepared and well characterized, including diffuse reflectance spectroscopy (DRS), X-ray diffraction (XRD), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), and scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM). The photocatalytic activity was examined in three reaction systems: (i) methanol dehydrogenation during gold photodeposition under UV/vis irradiation, (ii) oxidative decomposition of acetic acid (UV/vis), and (iii) oxidation of 2-propanol to acetone under visible light irradiation (λ > 450 nm). It was found that during subsequent deposition, gold is mainly formed on the surface of pre-deposited Au nanoparticles (NPs), localized on fine titania NPs, through the electrostatic attractions (negatively charged gold resulting from photogenerated electrons’ accumulation). This gold aggregation, though detrimental for UV activity (many “naked” large titania with low activity), is highly beneficial for vis activity because of efficient light harvesting and increased interface between gold and titania (gold deposits surrounded by fine titania NPs). Moreover, it was found that rutile is more active than anatase for plasmonic photocatalysis, probably due to easier electron transfer from gold via titania to adsorbed oxygen (more negative conduction band), which might hinder the back reaction (electron transfer: Au→TiO2→Au).
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) | 0.000 | 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".