The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Terminology, relative photonic efficiencies and quantum yields in heterogeneous photocatalysis. Part I: Suggested protocol
Open accessAbstract
The term photocatalysis is one amongst several in a quagmire of labels used to describe a photon-driven catalytic process; a simple description of photocatalysis is proposed herein. Other labels such as quantum yield and/or quantum efficiency used in solid/liquid and solid/gas hetero-geneous photocatalytic systems to express process efficiencies have come to refer (incorrectly) to the ratio of the rate of a given event to the rate of incident photons impinging on the reactor walls and typically for broadband radiation. There is no accord on the expression for process efficiency. At times quantum yield is defined; often, it is ill-defined and more frequently how it was assessed is not described. This has led to much confusion in the literature, not only because of its different meaning from homogeneous photochemistry, but also because the description of photon efficiency precludes comparison of results from different laboratories owing to variations in light sources, reactor geometries, and overall experimental conditions. The previously reported quantum yields are in fact apparent quantum yields, i.e. lower limits of the true quantum yields. We address this issue and argue that any reference to quantum yields or quantum efficiencies in a heterogeneous medium is inadvisable until the number of photons absorbed by the light harvester (the photocatalyst) is known. A practical and simple alternative is proposed for general use and in particular for processes employing complex reactor geometries: the concept of relative photonic efficiency (x r) is useful to compare process efficiencies using a given photocatalyst material and a given standard test molecule. A quantum yield can subsequently be calculated since f = x r f phenol, where f phenol denotes the quantum yield for the photocatalyzed oxidative transformation of phenol used as the standard secondary actinometer and Degussa P-25 TiO 2 as the standard photocatalyst. For heterogeneous suspensions (only), an additional method to determine quantum yields f is also proposed.
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
TiO2 photocatalysis and related surface phenomena
FUJISHIMA, A., ZHANG, X., & TRYK, D. (2008) · Surface Science Reports · doi:10.1016/j.surfrep.2008.10.001 · Cited by 6,737
Inorganic and organic UV filters: Their role and efficacy in sunscreens and suncare products
Serpone, N., Dondi, D., & Albini, A. (2007) · Inorganica Chimica Acta · doi:10.1016/j.ica.2005.12.057 · Cited by 711
Self-citationCoha, M., Farinelli, G., Tiraferri, A., Minella, M., & Vione, D. (2021) · Chemical Engineering Journal · doi:10.1016/j.cej.2021.128668 · Cited by 432
Commonly used UV filter toxicity on biological functions: review of last decade studies
Gilbert, E., Pirot, F., Bertholle, V., Roussel, L., Falson, F., & Padois, K. (2013) · International Journal of Cosmetic Science · doi:10.1111/ics.12030 · Cited by 150
Metadata
- Authors
- Serpone, N., & Salinaro, A.
- Venue
- Pure and Applied Chemistry
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 1999-02-28
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 303-320
- ISSN
- 0033-4545 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-3075
- OpenAlex
- W2103657484
- Cited by
- 219
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Terminology, relative photonic efficiencies and quantum yields in heterogeneous photocatalysis. Part I: Suggested protocol. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1351/pac199971020303
- The paper
- Serpone, N., & Salinaro, A. (1999). Terminology, relative photonic efficiencies and quantum yields in heterogeneous photocatalysis. Part I: Suggested protocol. Pure and Applied Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1351/pac199971020303
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.