MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321765782 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.2c07832

Quantification of the Shell Thickness of Tin Oxide/Gold Core–Shell Nanoparticles by X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy

2023· article· en· W4321765782 on OpenAlexafffund
Francisco J. Garza, Ramis Arbi, Muhammad Munir, Jong-Hyun Lim, Ayse Turak

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyTinShell (structure)NanoparticleMaterials scienceTin oxideColloidal goldCore (optical fiber)OxideX-raySpectroscopyX-ray spectroscopyNanotechnologyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Chemical engineeringChemistryMetallurgyOpticsComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Encapsulation of nanoparticles (NP) by a shell material provides characteristics and properties not achievable by the individual materials of the core and the shell. Therefore, the characterization of morphology parameters of core–shell nanoparticles (CSNP) is critical to determine their performance. In this work, an analysis to determine the shell thickness of CSNP has been conducted using a simple and noniterative procedure known as Shard’s methodology, where the conversion of XPS peak intensities into shell thickness can be performed. Implementing the Simulation of Electron Spectra for Surface Analysis (SESSA), we acquired an insight into the morphology and composition of the CSNP by simulating the spectra from XPS to extract the parameters (Shard’s methodology) and confirm the core–shell ratio with experimental spectra to quantify the shell thickness. The CSNPs were synthesized with reverse micelle templating using diblock copolymer micellar templates, using various ratios of tin and gold precursors to form SnO 2 @Au core–shell nanoparticles. Considering elastic-scattering effects, a good agreement was found in the quantification of the shell thicknesses with a variation inside the ±10% regime of the effective attenuation length (EAL). This work demonstrates the use of simulation software as a complementary tool to a multitechnique analysis for a detailed understanding of CSNP.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry CSame topicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207