Effects of Heteroatom Doping on the Electrochemical Hydrogen Uptake and Release of Pd-Decorated Reduced Graphene Oxide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heteroatom doping has been widely recognized as a key strategy for improving the electrochemical properties of graphene-based materials for hydrogen storage. However, a precise understanding of how heteroatom doping influences catalytic performance, specifically regarding the intricate effects of doping-induced electron redistribution, has been lacking. Here, we report on a comprehensive exploration of the electrochemical performance enhancement in Pd-decorated reduced graphene oxide (rGO) nanocomposites through fluorine (F) or nitrogen (N) doping. Various analytical techniques such as scanning electron microscopy (SEM), transmission electron microscopy (TEM), energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectroscopy, Raman spectroscopy, X-ray diffraction (XRD), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), X-ray absorption near edge structure (XANES), and extended X-ray absorption fine structure (EXAFS) were employed to thoroughly characterize the synthesized nanocomposites. The findings revealed that either F or N doping effectively addressed clustering issues of Pd nanoparticles formed on the rGO surface, resulting in improved homogeneity of Pd distribution. Electrochemical studies provided crucial insights into hydrogen adsorption–desorption behaviors. The heteroatom doped nanocomposites, Pd/N-rGO and Pd/F-rGO, exhibited superior electrochemical performance, which can be attributed to the increase of the active sites due to the N-/F-doping, respectively. The hydrogen discharge capacities of Pd/N-rGO (80.9 mAh g –1 ) and Pd/F-rGO (25.0 mAh g –1 ) nanocomposites were determined to be over 4.0 and 1.2 times higher than that of the Pd/rGO (20.1 mAh g –1 ), respectively. The distinctive electrochemical performances observed between the two types of heteroatom-containing nanocomposites highlight the subtle structural modifications of Pd nanoparticles as the key factor influencing performance. This research contributes essential knowledge to the evolving field of hydrogen storage materials, emphasizing the promising potential of heteroatom-doped Pd-decorated rGO nanocomposites for advancing clean and sustainable energy solutions.
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) | 0.000 | 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".