Spontaneous Production of H<sub>2</sub>O<sub>2</sub> at the Liquid–Ice Interface: A Potential Source of Atmospheric Oxidants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide We present experimental evidence for the spontaneous production of hydrogen peroxide (H 2 O 2 ) at the liquid–ice interface during the freezing of dilute salt solutions. Specifically, sample solutions containing NaCl, NaBr, NH 4 Cl, and NaI at concentrations between 10 –6 and 10 –1 M were subjected to freezing–melting cycles and then analyzed for H 2 O 2 content. The relationship between the production rate of H 2 O 2 and the salt concentration follows that of the Workman–Reynolds freezing potential (WRFP) values as a function of the salt concentration. Our results suggest that H 2 O 2 is formed at the liquid–ice interface from the self-recombination of hydroxyl radicals (OH·), produced from the oxidation of hydroxide anions due to the high electric field generated at the aqueous–ice interface under the WRFP effect. Furthermore, the involvement of O 2 likely acting as an electron capturer could promote to produce more OH radicals and hydroperoxyl radicals (HO 2 ·), thus enhancing the production of H 2 O 2 at the liquid–ice interface. Overall, this study suggests a novel mechanism of H 2 O 2 formation in ice via its spontaneous production at the liquid–ice interface, induced by the Workman–Reynolds effect.
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) | 0.001 | 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".