MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414543723 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.5c03751

Electrodeposited Gold Nanoparticles on a Screen-Printed Carbon Electrode Exhibit Distinct Electrochemical and Catalytic Properties Compared to Drop-Cast Gold Nanoparticles

2025· article· en· W4414543723 on OpenAlexafffund
Tyra Lewis, Sanela Martić

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicElectrochemical Analysis and Applications
Canadian institutionsTrent University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsElectrodeColloidal goldDielectric spectroscopyElectrochemistryCyclic voltammetryCatalysisElectron transferElectrocatalystChemically modified electrode

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The utilization of Au nanoparticles (AuNPs) for electrode fabrication often relies on the drop-casting of the chemically synthesized AuNP or electrochemically reducing Au 3+ directly onto a carbon electrode support. Such AuNP-functionalized electrodes have been extensively and ubiquitously used for various applications, including sensing and catalysis. However, there is no systematic study focusing on comprehensively evaluating the two types of electrode surfaces (drop-cast AuNPs vs electrochemically deposited eAuNPs) in terms of their electrochemical properties and electrocatalytic activity. In this study, we modified the screen-printed carbon electrodes (SPEs) to fabricate two distinct electrode surfaces, AuNP/SPE and eAuNP/SPE, for the extensive comparison of their electrochemical and catalytic properties. Specifically, both electrodes were characterized in acidic and basic electrolytes by cyclic voltammetry (CV) and exhibited similar electroactive surface area (ECSA), surface roughness, and AuO layer coverage, as well as spherical morphologies with different particle sizes. CV and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) uncovered the complex nature of the surfaces. The AuNP/SPE surface was heterogeneous, deviated from the linearity expected for potential vs square-root of scan rates, and exhibited lower current, slower diffusion, and smaller observed rates of electron transfer related to the solution redox probe, ferri/ferrocyanide. Notably, the significant differences in electrochemical properties of AuNP/SPE and eAuNP/SPE electrodes resulted in stark variances in their electrocatalytic activities as oxidase-mimics with glucose as a substrate. Higher anodic onset potential was required for glucose oxidation with AuNP/SPE, which also resulted in lower current and lower activity. Altogether, we identified specific electrochemical properties, such as surface heterogeneity and electron transfer, as the dominant determinants of the electrocatalytic activities of (e)AuNP-functionalized carbon electrodes. The unique surface properties observed for often interchangeably used electrodes explain the differential catalytic activities, which may be transferrable to other surfaces and substrates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry CSame topicElectrochemical Analysis and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207