MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308712049 · doi:10.3390/catal12111400

Sepiolite-Supported WS2 Nanosheets for Synergistically Promoting Photocatalytic Rhodamine B Degradation

2022· article· en· W4308712049 on OpenAlexaff
Jiaxuan Bai, Kaibin Cui, Xinlei Xie, Baizeng Fang, Fei Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCatalysts · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
Topic2D Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSepioliteRhodamine BMaterials scienceTungsten disulfideChemical engineeringPhotocatalysisMesoporous materialComposite numberDegradation (telecommunications)PolyvinylpyrrolidoneCatalysisNanotechnologyComposite materialChemistryOrganic chemistryPolymer chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pristine tungsten disulfide (WS2) nanosheets are extremely prone to agglomeration, leading to blocked active sites and the decrease of catalytic activity. In this work, highly dispersed WS2 nanosheets were fabricated via a one-step in situ solvothermal method, using sepiolite nanofibers as a functional carrier. The ammonium tetrathiotungstate was adopted as W and S precursors, and N,N-dimethylformamide could provide a neutral reaction environment. The electron microscope analysis revealed that the WS2 nanosheets were stacked compactly in the shape of irregular plates, while they were uniformly grown on the surface of sepiolite nanofibers. Meanwhile, the BET measurement confirmed that the as-prepared composite has a larger specific surface area and is more mesoporous than the pure WS2. Due to the improved dispersion of WS2 and the synergistic effect between WS2 and the mesoporous sepiolite mineral which significantly facilitated the mass transport, the WS2/sepiolite composite exhibited ca. 2.6 times the photocatalytic efficiency of the pure WS2 for rhodamine B degradation. This work provides a potential method for low-cost batch preparation of high-quality 2D materials via assembling on natural materials.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.726

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatalystsSame topic2D Materials and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207