Copper Nanoparticle Heterogeneous Catalytic ‘Click’ Cycloaddition Confirmed by Single-Molecule Spectroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Colloidal or heterogeneous nanocatalysts can improve the range and diversity of Cu(I)-catalysed click reactions and facilitate catalyst separation and reuse. Catalysis by metal nanoparticles raises the question as to whether heterogeneous catalysts may cause homogeneous catalysis through metal ion leaching, since the catalytic process could be mediated by the particle, or by metal ions released from it. The question is critical as unwanted homogeneous processes could offset the benefits of heterogeneous catalysis. Here, we combine standard bench scale techniques with single-molecule spectroscopy to monitor single catalytic events in real time and demonstrate that click catalysis occurs directly at the surface of copper nanoparticles; this general approach could be implemented in other systems. We use ‘from the mole to the molecule’ to describe this emerging idea in which mole scale reactions can be optimized through an intimate understanding of the catalytic process at the single-molecule—single catalytic nanoparticle level.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".