Pt Particles on a Dynamic TiO <sub>2</sub> Support in Near-Ambient Conditions–Disentangling Size, Pressure, and Support Effects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Platinum particles on reducible oxides are known to form complex and highly dynamic catalyst systems at elevated pressures and temperatures, often adopting active structures that differ from those found at room temperature and under ultrahigh vacuum (UHV). Here, we study the oxidation and structural evolution of subnanometer Pt clusters and nanoparticles supported on rutile TiO 2 (110) across an oxygen pressure range from UHV to 0.1 mbar, using near-ambient pressure X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (NAP-XPS), scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) under UHV and NAP conditions, and low-energy ion scattering (LEIS). Our results reveal distinct differences in oxidation behavior and thermal stability between Pt nanoparticles and clusters, which are further modulated by the support stoichiometry and oxygen pressure. Small Pt clusters become oxidized even at room temperature but are susceptible to accelerated sintering in 0.1 mbar O 2 at elevated temperatures. In contrast, well-crystallized Pt nanoparticles on near-stoichiometric TiO 2 show weaker oxidation. On a reduced, defective TiO 2 support, Pt instead quickly becomes deeply buried by new titania layers, which are formed during support reoxidation. This process appears to result primarily from interactions of the support with the gas phase, unlike the classical, self-limited encapsulation that is induced by the strong metal–support interaction (SMSI). Finally, we address the full complexity of real catalysts in a direct side-by-side comparison of the single-crystalline model system with a Pt-loaded TiO 2 powder catalyst (P25). We conclude that the stoichiometry of the model supports must be carefully chosen and controlled to accurately reproduce the expected state of powder supports during redox reactions.
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".