Structural and Electronic Impact on Various Substrates of TiO2 Thin Film Using Sol-Gel Spin Coating Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Titanium dioxide (TiO2) thin films have been deposited on Corning 7059 glass and Fused quartz silicate substrates using Sol-Gel spinning coating technique. The effect of annealing temperature on the structure, surface morphology, optical and electrical properties of these films are characterized by Raman, XRD, FT/IR, UVvis and four-point-probes measurements. On glass substrates, there are four Raman active bands are observed: 3Anatase [A<149 cm-1>, A<523 cm-1> and A<646 cm-1>] and 1 Rutile B<401 cm-1>. On silica substrates, additional two more bands which are R<859 cm-1> and B<1068 cm-1> detected. The deposited films show polycrystalline nature with high XRD intensity peaks in (110), (200) and (211) orientation corresponding to anatase and rutile phases respectively with tetragonal BCC structure. The other orientations (101), (111), (210), (211), (220), (201), (002), (204) and (116) are also observed for all films with low intensities. XRD crystal sizes are found to increase with increasing annealing temperature on both substrates. Maximum crystal sizes are found to be ~31 nm on silica substrates and ~23 nm on glass substrates at 500 oC. On glass substrate, TiO2 thin film shows the agglomeration of various non- uniform flaky-type of structures. On silica substrate, the FESEM micrographs shows the following observations: (i) particles are spherical in shape with forming different islands (ii) particles are soft agglomerates/spongy in nature with uniform surface, (iii) each spherical agglomerate contains many particles in the nanometric range and (iv) the agglomerate size is in between 40 and 110 nm. FE-SEM TiO2 particles size distribution at 500 oC showed that the average particle size is 89.55 and 110.35 nm on glass and silica substrates respectively.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".