MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415320879 · doi:10.1016/j.seppur.2025.135735

Influence of Pd nanoparticles on the structural stability and hydrogen separation of graphene oxide membranes

2025· article· en· W4415320879 on OpenAlexaff
Sajjad Mohsenpour, Patricia Gorgojo

Bibliographic record

VenueSeparation and Purification Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphene research and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónFaculty of Science and Engineering, University of ManchesterUniversity of Manchester
KeywordsPermeanceSelectivityMembraneGrapheneOxidePalladium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thin graphene oxide (GO) membranes decorated with palladium (Pd) nanoparticles (NPs) were fabricated and evaluated for high-temperature H₂/N₂ separation. Pd NPs were synthesized by chemical reduction using ascorbic acid and incorporated into GO nanosheets. Laminate thin film composite (TFC) membranes were prepared by vacuum filtration of a solution of GO and Pd NPs at varying loadings (0.1–5 wt%) onto polyethersulfone (PES) supports. A neat GO membrane (225 nm) exhibited an H₂ permeance of 500 GPU and an H₂/N₂ selectivity of ~31 at 220 °C, attributed to thermal reduction of GO that enhances molecular sieving. Incorporation of 0.1 wt% Pd raised permeance to 650 GPU with a moderate drop in selectivity to 28, while 0.5 wt% Pd enhanced permeance to 1400 GPU with a selectivity of 17.5. Higher Pd loadings (5 wt%) further increased permeance to 16,000 GPU but caused selectivity to drop below 5, due to nanoparticle agglomeration and the formation of nonselective voids. These results demonstrate that low Pd loadings can enhance hydrogen flux with a moderate selectivity loss, but excessive Pd disrupts GO layering. Pd NPs, which exhibit lower hydrogen embrittlement susceptibility than bulk Pd, offer a promising route to high-temperature H₂ separation with optimized Pd content.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.288 · 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.

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeparation and Purification TechnologySame topicGraphene research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207