Catalyst Design: Counter Anion Effect on Ni Nanocatalysts Anchored on Hollow Carbon Spheres
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Herein, the influence of the counter anion on the structural properties of hollow carbon spheres (HCS) support was investigated by varying the nickel metal precursor salts applied. TEM and SEM micrographs revealed the dimensional dependence of the HCS shell on the Ni precursor salt, as evidenced by thick (~42 nm) and thin (~23 nm) shells for the acetate and chloride-based salts, respectively. Importantly, the effect of the precursor salt on the textural properties of the HCS nanosupports (~565 m2/gNi(acet)) and ~607 m2/gNiCl), influenced the growth of the Ni nanoparticles, viz for the acetate-(ca 6.4 nm)- and chloride (ca 12 nm)-based salts, respectively. Further, XRD and PDF analysis showed the dependence of the reduction mechanism relating to nickel and the interaction of the nickel–carbon support on the type of counter anion used. Despite the well-known significance of the counter anion on the size and crystallinity of Ni nanoparticles, little is known about the influence of such counter anions on the physicochemical properties of the carbon support. Through this study, we highlight the importance of the choice of the Ni-salt on the size of Ni in Ni–carbon-based nanocatalysts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".