The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Facet-Dependent Photoelectrochemical Performance of TiO2Nanostructures: An Experimental and Computational Study
Abstract
The behavior of crystalline nanoparticles depends strongly on which facets are exposed. Some facets are more active than others, but it is difficult to selectively isolate particular facets. This study provides fundamental insights into photocatalytic and photoelectrochemical performance of three types of TiO(2) nanoparticles with predominantly exposed {101}, {010}, or {001} facets, where 86-99% of the surface area is the desired facet. Photodegradation of methyl orange reveals that {001}-TiO(2) has 1.79 and 3.22 times higher photocatalytic activity than {010} and {101}-TiO(2), respectively. This suggests that the photochemical performance is highly correlated with the surface energy and the number of under-coordinated surface atoms. In contrast, the photoelectrochemical performance of the faceted TiO(2) nanoparticles sensitized with the commercially available MK-2 dye was highest with {010}-TiO(2) which yielded an overall cell efficiency of 6.1%, compared to 3.2% for {101}-TiO(2) and 2.6% for {001}-TiO(2) prepared under analogous conditions. Measurement of desorption kinetics and accompanying computational modeling suggests a stronger covalent interaction of the dye with the {010} and {101} facets compared with the {001} facet. Time-resolved THz spectroscopy and transient absorption spectroscopy measure faster electron injection dynamics when MK-2 is bound to {010} compared to other facets, consistent with extensive computational simulations which indicate that the {010} facet provides the most efficient and direct pathway for interfacial electron transfer. Our experimental and computational results establish for the first time that photoelectrochemical performance is dependent upon the binding energy of the dye as well as the crystalline structure of the facet, as opposed to surface energy alone.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Chen, F., Huang, H., Ye, L., Zhang, T., Zhang, Y., Han, X., & Ma, T. (2018) · Advanced Functional Materials · doi:10.1002/adfm.201804284 · Cited by 441
Facet‐Engineered Surface and Interface Design of Photocatalytic Materials
Bai, S., Wang, L., Li, Z., & Xiong, Y. (2017) · Advanced Science · doi:10.1002/advs.201600216 · Cited by 429
Nanoisozymes: Crystal‐Facet‐Dependent Enzyme‐Mimetic Activity of V2O5 Nanomaterials
Ghosh, S., Roy, P., Karmodak, N., Jemmis, E. D., & Mugesh, G. (2018) · Angewandte Chemie International Edition · doi:10.1002/anie.201800681 · Cited by 267
Chen, Y., Soler, L., Cazorla, C., Oliveras, J., Bastús, N. G., Puntes, V. F., & Llorca, J. (2023) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-41976-2 · Cited by 157
Faceted TiO2 photocatalytic degradation of anthraquinone in aquatic solution under solar irradiation
Ye, T., Qi, W., An, X., Liu, H., & Qu, J. (2019) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.319 · Cited by 32
Metadata
- Authors
- Li, C., Koenigsmann, C., Ding, W., Rudshteyn, B., Yang, K. R., Regan, K. P., Konezny, S. J., Batista, V. S., Brudvig, G. W., Schmuttenmaer, C. A., & Kim, J.-H.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Chemical Society
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2015-01-23
- Volume
- 137
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1520-1529
- ISSN
- 0002-7863 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5126
- OpenAlex
- W2313241212
- Cited by
- 249
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.