MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414709608 · doi:10.1002/cctc.202501125

Dynamic Molten Cu–In Droplets Catalyze Selective Synthesis of Multi‐Walled Carbon Nanotubes During Methane Pyrolysis

2025· article· en· W4414709608 on OpenAlexaff
Sawyer d’Entremont, Natascha Miederhoff, Maryam Buraimoh, Xiaotao Bi, D. Chester Upham

Bibliographic record

VenueChemCatChem · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon Nanotubes in Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbon nanotubePyrolysisTransmission electron microscopyCatalysisMethaneYield (engineering)Raman spectroscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The generation of multi‐walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) typically utilizes solid catalyst nanoparticles. These particles often exhibit a liquid‐like nature during synthesis and remain encapsulated inside the final MWCNTs. Molten Cu–In has been recently reported to produce high amounts of MWCNT in bubble column reactors during methane pyrolysis for clean H 2 generation. In the present work, nanodroplets are isolated and studied on supports. The droplets are observed to deform into a head and tail geometry and generate bamboo‐like MWCNTs. The compositions of 50–70 at.% Cu repeatedly generate dense bundles of MWCNTs, while higher or lower compositions yield little or no MWCNTs. The lower surface tension of the alloy at these compositions reduces the thermodynamic driving force for coalescence, stabilizing small droplets at high temperature. Graphitic structure with some defects is confirmed by transmission electron microscopy and Raman spectroscopy, showing 3.35 +/−0.08 Å interlayer spacing and an I D /I G ratio of 0.87 +/−0.13, respectively. Droplets distributed between 10 nm and 1 micron generate MWCNTs 10–400 nm in diameter, suggesting droplets above 400 nm do not generate MWCNTs at any catalyst composition. Bundles of MWCNT exceeding hundreds of microns are observed in reaction times over 1 h.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemCatChemSame topicCarbon Nanotubes in CompositesFrench-language works237,207