MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380534840 · doi:10.1016/j.cartre.2023.100273

The base versus tip growth mode of carbon nanotubes by catalytic hydrocarbon cracking: Review, challenges and opportunities

2023· article· en· W4380534840 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCarbon Trends · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon Nanotubes in Composites
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbon nanotubeMaterials scienceCatalysisNucleationCarbon fibersNanotechnologyMethaneCokeCrackingHydrocarbonChemical engineeringFluid catalytic crackingComposite materialChemistryOrganic chemistryMetallurgyComposite number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrogen gas production using catalytic hydrocarbon cracking on metal nanoparticles has become a vital bridge technology, as this process, unlike the traditional methane-based reforming process, does not co-produce carbon gasses (e.g., CO, CO2). The major benefit of direct catalytic methane cracking using a nanostructured catalyst is the formation of solid carbon in high-value products, such as carbon nanotubes (CNTs) or filaments. This solid carbon can then be removed physically and valorized. However, it is challenging to design a catalyst capable of sustaining its activity after solid carbon has started to deposit and grow, meanwhile preventing the formation of coke. For CNTs, in particular, the base growth mode of CNTs is the desired pathway, as the catalyst can then be regenerated and re-used. If the CNTs are formed under the tip-growth mode, the catalyst particle will be lifted off the support of the regeneration and reusability is lost. Therefore, the study of CNTs growth modes is a vital topic, both experimentally and theoretically, of designing appropriate catalysts. To date, enormous efforts have been made to investigate conditions where the CNTs base growth mode can be maintained during the carbon deposition process. Several possible correlations and mechanisms regarding the base growth mode have been explored and established. Theoretical calculations and numerical simulations across length scales were conducted to investigate the nucleation mechanism and growth of CNTs. Density functional theory (DFT), classical and quantum-based molecular dynamics (MD) and Monte Carlo (MC) simulations were also carried out to study the initial CNT cap formation and its encapsulation during the catalytic hydrocarbon cracking process. A thermodynamics-based nucleation formula of CNTs for both the base and tip growth modes was also established. However, there is still no consensus on what determines the CNT growth modes and what the roles are of the various influencing factors such as the nanoparticle size, the oxidation state of the catalyst, the mechanical properties of CNT, and the catalyst-support interaction. This paper reviews the current status of CNT's growth mechanism development. The benefits and limitations of theory and modeling approaches concerning CNT growth modes are discussed.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.233 · 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