Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 7 minor 5 references

Platinum is a Photocatalyst: Large Visible-Light Quantum Efficiency Revealed

T0 review · 2 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-07-08 · glm-5.2

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Platinum absorbs visible light and drives photochemistry, not just catalysis

desk verdict Pt nanoislands on TiO₂ show ~1% IQE for visible-light photochemistry, ~20× per-atom advantage over Au at 455 nm — the core finding is real but the 20× ratio carries uncharacterized systematic uncertainty from 3D morphology assumptions. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.05172 v1 pith:R2UIGUAZ submitted 2026-07-06 cond-mat.mes-hall

Olivier Henrotte , Yin Chak Wong , Jordan Edwards , Simão Meneses João , Štěpán Kment , Emiliano Cortés , Johannes Lischner , Alberto Naldoni This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords photocatalysisplatinumvisiblelightquantumefficiencyscanningphotoelectrochemicalmicroscopySchottkyjunctionhotcarrierstitaniumdioxide
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that platinum, long treated as a passive catalytic co-catalyst in metal-semiconductor photocatalytic systems, is itself a visible-light-active photocatalyst when structured as discrete ~10 nm nanoislands on TiO₂. Using scanning photoelectrochemical microscopy, the authors measure wavelength-resolved external quantum efficiency (EQE) for both Pt and Au nanoisland arrays under identical conditions. They find that small Pt nanoislands exhibit broadband visible-light photoactivity, with an EQE per atom roughly 20 times higher than Au at 455 nm and about 2 times higher at 595 nm (Au's spectral optimum). The paper further reports an approximately wavelength-independent internal quantum efficiency (IQE) of ~1% for Pt across the visible spectrum, contrasting with Au's strongly wavelength-dependent response tied to its plasmon resonance. The authors attribute Pt's behavior to its broadband, absorption-dominated optical response: rather than relying on a sharp plasmon resonance like Au, Pt generates electron-hole pairs across the visible range via heavily damped interband transitions, and the Schottky barrier at the Pt-TiO₂ junction filters these carriers to produce chemically useful charge separation. The paper also identifies nanoisland connectivity as a critical parameter: when Pt islands merge into continuous films, photoactivity collapses due to recombination pathways, establishing that the discrete-island morphology at dimensions comparable to Pt's ~10 nm electron mean free path is essential for efficient carrier extraction.

What carries the argument

The key machinery is the interplay of three elements: (1) Pt's broadband, absorption-dominated optical response in the visible, driven by dense d-band interband transitions near the Fermi level rather than a sharp plasmon resonance; (2) the Schottky barrier at the Pt-TiO₂ junction (approximately 1.3 eV), which filters photogenerated electrons above the barrier energy into TiO₂, leaving holes extractable at the metal-electrolyte interface; and (3) the nanoisland size matching Pt's ~10 nm electron mean free path, ensuring that hot carriers reach the interface before thermalization. The scanning photoelectrochemical microscopy (SPECM) platform provides the operando measurement: a focused light-

What would settle it

If direct absorption measurements (rather than extinction-derived estimates) for these specific Pt nanoisland geometries reveal a significant scattering component, the ~1% IQE figure would be revised downward, weakening the claim that Pt's broadband absorption translates uniformly into chemical charge extraction.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that discrete ~10 nm Pt nanoislands on TiO₂ convert visible photons into chemically extractable charge carriers with an internal quantum efficiency of approximately 1% that is nearly flat across the visible spectrum, and with a per-atom efficiency exceeding that of Au by up to 20-fold in the blue-green region. This overturns the assumption that Pt's strongly damped optical response in the visible makes it photochemically inert. The mechanism involves broadband interband absorption in Pt generating electron-hole pairs, with the Schottky barrier at the Pt-TiO₂ interface acting as an energy filter that separates carriers before they thermalize. The discrete nanoisland几何

Load-bearing premise

The internal quantum efficiency of ~1% for Pt is derived by dividing the measured EQE by an absorption estimated from extinction spectra, assuming Pt nanoislands are non-scattering. This scattering assumption is borrowed from measurements on Pt nanodisks of different geometry than the irregular nanoislands studied here, so if the actual scattering fraction differs, the IQE values could shift substantially.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Catalytic metals previously dismissed as optically inert in the visible (e.g., Pd, Rh, Ir) may exhibit similar broadband photocatalytic behavior when nanostructured to dimensions matching their carrier mean free paths and placed on suitable semiconductors.
  • Photocatalyst design could shift from optimizing plasmon resonance spectral overlap (as with Au) to optimizing interfacial energy-level alignment and nanoisland discreteness for non-plasmonic metals.
  • The ~1% wavelength-independent IQE for Pt suggests that broadband photocatalytic systems could be built without spectral tuning, simplifying device architectures for solar-to-chemical conversion.
  • The connectivity-suppression effect implies that fabrication methods controlling island isolation (dewetting, templating, atomic layer deposition) are as important as material choice for photocatalytic performance.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the ~1% IQE holds for other Group 10 transition metals (Pd, Ni) on high-permittivity semiconductors, it would suggest that d-band density of states near the Fermi level is a general predictor of broadband photocatalytic activity, independent of plasmonic enhancement.
  • The size-matching condition (nanoisland diameter ≈ electron mean free path) may define a universal design rule: optimal photocatalytic nanoisland size for any metal equals its non-equilibrium carrier diffusion length, since this maximizes the probability that a photogenerated carrier reaches an interface before thermalization.
  • The dielectric environment sensitivity reported for Pt (4-fold enhancement in above-barrier carriers when εm increases from 2 to 4) suggests that embedding Pt nanoislands in even higher-permittivity oxides (e.g., SrTiO₃, BaTiO₃) could push IQE well beyond 1%.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 7 minor

Summary. This manuscript reports quantitative scanning photoelectrochemical microscopy (SPECM) measurements of visible-light external quantum efficiency (EQE) for Au and Pt nanoislands on TiO2, finding that discrete ~10 nm Pt nanoislands exhibit broadband photoactivity with EQE-per-atom ~15–20× higher than Au at 455 nm and ~1.2–2× higher at 595 nm. The authors further estimate an approximately wavelength-independent internal quantum efficiency (IQE) of ~1% for Pt across the visible spectrum. Hot-carrier generation calculations using atomistic tight-binding models provide qualitative support for the observed spectral trends. The central claim—that Pt is not merely a passive co-catalyst but an active visible-light absorber when nanostructured to dimensions comparable to its carrier mean free path—is well-motivated and supported by the experimental data. The SPECM methodology is established and the co-localized SEM/extinction approach is appropriate. However, the headline per-atom comparison rests on an untested geometric assumption (perfect-sphere normalization) that could systematically bias the Au–Pt ratio, and the IQE estimate depends on extinction-to-absorption conversion assumptions borrowed from nanodisk literature that may not directly transfer to the present nanoisland geometries.

Significance. The paper addresses a genuine gap in the field: quantitative, operando measurement of Pt's visible-light photoactivity in metal–semiconductor hybrids, directly challenging the prevailing view of Pt as a passive electron sink. The combination of position-resolved SPECM with co-localized morphology and extinction spectroscopy is a strength, as is the systematic comparison of Au and Pt under identical conditions on the same substrate. The hot-carrier calculations use independently parametrized tight-binding models (Refs. 40, 41) and experimental dielectric functions (Ref. 42), providing a transparent mechanistic framework. The finding that Pt photoactivity is suppressed upon nanoisland connectivity is a useful, falsifiable design rule. The ~1% wavelength-independent IQE for Pt, if robust, is a notable result that could reframe how catalytic metals with damped optical responses are considered in photocatalytic architectures.

major comments (2)
  1. The headline claim of '~20× higher EQE-per-atom' for Pt vs Au at 455 nm depends on converting SEM projected-area diameters to atom counts by treating dewetted nanoislands as perfect spheres (Section on normalizations; Figs. S10–S13). Dewetted metal islands on TiO2 are spherical caps whose contact angle depends on the metal–substrate system; Au and Pt have different surface energies and wetting angles on TiO2 (Au typically ~120–130°, Pt ~90–110°). If the contact angles differ systematically between Au and Pt, the sphere model introduces a material-specific bias in the d³-to-volume conversion that directly affects the per-atom ratio. Additionally, the Pt size distribution (9±9 nm) is very broad, so the atom count—scaling as d³—is dominated by the distribution tail and is sensitive to the exact distribution shape, not just the mean. Without AFM or TEM cross-sections to constrain island高度,或至
  2. The IQE estimation (Figure S14, discussion in main text) approximates absorption from extinction by assuming Pt is non-scattering (0%) and Au is ~10% scattering, justified by nanodisk data from Refs. 6,7. For particles of 9–33 nm at 400–850 nm, Rayleigh scattering is expected to be small, and the Figure S14 sensitivity analysis (Pt: 0–10%, Au: 0–20%) reportedly shows negligible influence on the conclusions. This assumption is probably reasonable in practice, but the manuscript should state more explicitly that the scattering fractions are extrapolated from nanodisk geometries and that direct absorption measurements (e.g., integrating sphere) would be preferable. The ~1% wavelength-independent IQE for Pt is a central result; its robustness should be assessed with reference to the physical (d/λ)⁴ scaling rather than solely by analogy to nanodisk literature.
minor comments (7)
  1. The abstract states '~20 times higher' at 455 nm, while the main text (Figure 4a discussion) states '~15-folds higher' at 455 nm and '~1.2-times higher' at 595 nm. The conclusions section reverts to '20-folds higher.' These values should be reconciled and the source of the discrepancy clarified.
  2. Section 1 (Methods): 'approximating all nanoislands shape to a circumference' should read 'circle' or 'equivalent circular cross-section.' Also, the diameter retrieval from ImageJ should specify whether the reported diameter is an equivalent diameter based on projected area.
  3. The Schottky barrier heights (ΦB = 1.1 eV for Au-TiO2, 1.3 eV for Pt-TiO2) are described as 'representative parameters' (Ref. 24). The manuscript should note the expected range of variation and how sensitive the hot-carrier above-barrier population is to this parameter, since it enters the theoretical analysis.
  4. Figure 2b: the y-axis label and units for EQE should be clearly stated in the figure caption. The color coding (purple-to-pink for Au, teal-to-cyan for Pt) is not self-explanatory without reference to the caption.
  5. The extinction spectra (Figure 2e) are reported as −log(T) where T is normalized to bare TiO2/ITO. The spectral range is limited to 400–670 nm due to the lamp, but EQE is measured up to 850 nm. The manuscript should note the absence of extinction data beyond 670 nm when discussing the 740 and 850 nm EQE points.
  6. References 4, 5, 19, and 40 appear to have 2025/2026 publication dates. Please verify these citations are accurate and not preprints or in-press articles without corresponding DOI resolution.
  7. The term 'photocatalyst' in the title may be debated: the measured reaction is a redox probe (FcDM) oxidation, not a catalytic transformation. Consider whether 'photoactive' or 'light-responsive' would be more precise, or clarify in the abstract that the claim refers to photoelectrochemical activity rather than photocatalytic turnover of a substrate.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for a careful and constructive report. Both major comments identify legitimate concerns about geometric assumptions in our normalizations. We address each below and commit to concrete revisions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Major Comment 1: The headline claim of '~20× higher EQE-per-atom' for Pt vs Au at 455 nm depends on converting SEM projected-area diameters to atom counts by treating dewetted nanoislands as perfect spheres. Dewetted metal islands on TiO2 are spherical caps whose contact angle depends on the metal–substrate system; Au and Pt have different surface energies and wetting angles on TiO2 (Au typically ~120–130°, Pt ~90–110°). If the contact angles differ systematically between Au and Pt, the sphere model introduces a material-specific bias in the d³-to-volume conversion that directly affects the per-atom ratio. Additionally, the Pt size distribution (9±9 nm) is very broad, so the atom count—scaling as d³—is dominated by the distribution tail and is sensitive to the exact distribution shape, not just the mean. Without AFM or TEM cross-sections to constrain island height, the per-atom ratio is悬

    Authors: The referee raises a valid and important concern. We acknowledge that the perfect-sphere assumption is an approximation and that different contact angles for Au and Pt on TiO2 could introduce a material-specific bias in the d³-to-volume conversion. We agree that AFM or TEM cross-sectional measurements would strengthen the per-atom comparison, and we will attempt to obtain AFM height data on our samples during the revision period. However, we wish to note several mitigating factors. First, we already provide four independent normalization schemes (per nanoisland, per atom, per surface area, per outer-shell atom; Figures S10–S13), and the qualitative conclusion that small Pt nanoislands are at least as efficient as Au on a per-metal-utilization basis holds across all four. The per-atom normalization is highlighted as the most physically motivated descriptor, but it is not the sole basis for the claim. Second, regarding the broad Pt size distribution (9±9 nm): the atom-count calculation uses the full measured size distribution from SEM rather than the mean diameter alone, so the distribution shape is already incorporated. Third, we can quantify the sensitivity of the per-atom ratio to the contact-angle assumption. For a spherical cap with contact angle θ, the volume scales as V ∝ d³ × f(θ), where f(θ) is a shape factor. If Au and Pt have contact angles of ~125° and ~100° respectively, the ratio of shape factors f_Au/f_Pt differs from unity by roughly 15–25%, which would modify the ~15–20× ratio but would not erase the order-of-magnitude difference. We will add this sensitivity analysis explicitly to the revised Supplementary Information and temper the headline claim accordingly, reporting a range rather than a single number. We will also add a discussion of the contact-gec revision: no

  2. Referee: Major Comment 2: The IQE estimation approximates absorption from extinction by assuming Pt is non-scattering (0%) and Au is ~10% scattering, justified by nanodisk data from Refs. 6,7. For particles of 9–33 nm at 400–850 nm, Rayleigh scattering is expected to be small, and the Figure S14 sensitivity analysis reportedly shows negligible influence on the conclusions. This assumption is probably reasonable in practice, but the manuscript should state more explicitly that the scattering fractions are extrapolated from nanodisk geometries and that direct absorption measurements (e.g., integrating sphere) would be preferable. The ~1% wavelength-independent IQE for Pt is a central result; its robustness should be assessed with reference to the physical (d/λ)⁴ scaling rather than solely by analogy to nanodisk literature.

    Authors: We agree with both points and will revise the manuscript accordingly. First, we will explicitly state in the main text that the scattering fractions are extrapolated from nanodisk geometries (Refs. 6, 7) and that direct absorption measurements (e.g., integrating sphere) would be preferable for our nanoisland morphology. We will add this as a stated limitation. Second, the referee's suggestion to assess robustness via the physical (d/λ)⁴ Rayleigh scaling is well-taken. For our largest particles (d ~ 33 nm) at the shortest wavelength (λ ~ 400 nm), the size parameter d/λ ~ 0.08, and the Rayleigh (d/λ)⁴ scaling gives a scattering-to-absorption ratio on the order of 10⁻³–10⁻⁴ for these highly absorbing metals, consistent with the negligible scattering assumption for Pt. For Au at the LSPR (~595 nm), resonant enhancement increases scattering somewhat, but the ~10% estimate remains reasonable for d ~ 30 nm. We will add this (d/λ)⁴-based argument to the Supplementary Information alongside the existing sensitivity analysis (Figure S14) to provide a physically grounded justification independent of the nanodisk analogy. We note that the Figure S14 sensitivity analysis already covers Pt scattering from 0–10% and Au from 0–20%, showing negligible influence on the conclusions; the (d/λ)⁴ argument provides additional theoretical support for this range. revision: no

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: experimental EQE data and theoretical hot-carrier model are independently sourced.

full rationale

The paper's central claims rest on experimentally measured EQE data from SPECM, which is independent of the theoretical hot-carrier calculations. The hot-carrier model (Ref. 27, by overlapping authors Jin/Lischner) uses independently parametrized tight-binding models (Refs. 40, 41) and experimental dielectric functions (Ref. 42), not fitted parameters from this paper. The model provides qualitative support (spectral trends) but is not used to derive the headline quantitative claims (20x EQE-per-atom, ~1% IQE). The IQE is derived from EQE divided by absorption approximated from extinction spectra with literature-justified scattering assumptions (Refs. 6, 7), not from the model. The per-atom normalization uses a perfect-sphere geometric model applied to SEM-derived diameters—this is an untested approximation (a correctness risk), but it is not circular: the input (SEM diameters) is not defined in terms of the output (EQE-per-atom). Self-citations (Refs. 20, 23, 26 by Henrotte/Naldoni) are methodological (SPECM setup, diffusion model) and do not form a load-bearing chain where the central result reduces to a prior claim by the same authors. No step in the derivation chain reduces to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities, particles, or forces. The free parameters are standard physical quantities (Schottky barriers, scattering fractions) taken from literature rather than invented. The axioms are domain assumptions about the system's behavior, some standard (floating substrate), some specific to this paper's analysis (spherical approximation, non-scattering Pt). No circularity from invented entities.

free parameters (5)
  • Schottky barrier height Au-TiO₂ = 1.1 eV
    Representative value from Ref. 24, not measured for these specific nanoislands. Used in band diagram and hot-carrier model threshold.
  • Schottky barrier height Pt-TiO₂ = 1.3 eV
    Representative value from Ref. 24, not measured for these specific nanoislands. Used in band diagram and hot-carrier model threshold.
  • Scattering fraction for Pt = 0%
    Assumed non-scattering based on nanodisk literature (Refs. 6,7). Used to convert extinction to absorption for IQE estimation.
  • Scattering fraction for Au = ~10%
    Assumed low-scattering based on nanodisk literature (Refs. 6,7,37). Used to convert extinction to absorption for IQE estimation.
  • Dielectric environment εm = 4 (TiO₂) or 2 (water/glass)
    Chosen to represent TiO₂ vs. colloidal environment in hot-carrier calculations. Explained in Fig. S8 caption.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Pt nanoislands can be treated as non-scattering in the visible spectrum
    Stated when estimating IQE from extinction: 'we treat Pt as non-scattering.' Based on nanodisk data (Refs. 6,7), not directly verified for nanoislands.
  • domain assumption The substrate being electrically floating ensures measured currents report only local interfacial photochemistry
    Stated in SPECM platform section. If stray currents or photovoltaic effects in the substrate contribute, this assumption would be violated.
  • ad hoc to paper Hot-carrier generation rate equals the rate of hot electrons exceeding ΦB
    Stated in hot carrier section: 'This rate is assumed equal to the generation rate of hot electrons with energies exceeding ΦB.' This equates generation with extraction-eligible population, omitting transport and interfacial effects.
  • ad hoc to paper Nanoislands can be approximated as perfect spheres for per-atom normalization
    Stated when normalizing EQE: 'considering the islands as perfect spheres.' SEM images show irregular shapes.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Platinum is a Photocatalyst: Large Visible-Light Quantum Efficiency Revealed." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/R2UIGUAZ

@misc{pith2026260705172,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Platinum is a Photocatalyst: Large Visible-Light Quantum Efficiency Revealed},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/R2UIGUAZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.05172}
}
read the original abstract

Metal-semiconductor junctions in optoelectronic devices are commonly engineered to promote charge separation. In Pt/TiO2 Schottky junctions, Pt is typically regarded as a catalytic electron sink rather than a visible-light-active component. Here, we demonstrate that Pt nanoislands on TiO2 can generate photochemically active carriers under visible light excitation. Using quantitative scanning photoelectrochemical microscopy, we measure the wavelength-resolved external quantum efficiency (EQE) of Au and Pt nanoisland arrays on TiO2, and correlate their reactivity with their morphology and extinction spectra. Discrete 10 nm Pt nanoislands exhibit robust broadband visible light photoactivity - exceeding the photoactivity of similar-sized Au nanoislands under blue-green excitation - whereas Pt's photoactivity is strongly suppressed when the nanoislands are connected. Surprisingly, Pt exhibits an EQE-per-atom approx. 20 times higher than Au at 455 nm and approx. 2 times higher at 595 nm (at Au's optimum). We show an approximately wavelength-independent Pt internal quantum efficiency of approx. 1 percent across the visible spectral region. These findings reposition catalytic metals with strongly damped optical response in the visible as light-responsive components in metal-semiconductor hybrids, challenging the prevailing perception that they function solely as passive co-catalysts in photocatalytic systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.05172 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Scanning photoelectrochemical microscopy platform and energetic framework for Au￾TiO2 and Pt-TiO2 photoactivity. (a) Schematic of the SPECM configuration. (b) Energy-level band showing the relevant electronic levels of Au and Pt (Fermi level EF; schematic sp- and d-bands), the TiO2 band edges (conduction band, C.B.; valence band, V.B.), and the FcDM/FcDM+ redox couple. (c,d) Electronic band structure of Au (c), and … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Position-resolved external quantum efficiency (EQE), morphology, and optical properties of Au and Pt nanoislands. (a) SPECM photoactivity map acquired over the Pt nanoisland array and the Au nanoisland array under visible illumination, used to identify the scan trajectories and regions of interest; the stars indicate the centre of the arrays. The markers (i) to (v) correspond to positions of interest. (b) EQE as a f… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Comparison of external quantum efficiency and theoretical hot carrier generation with above Schottky barrier energy of Au and Pt nanoislands on TiO2 thin film. (a) External quantum efficiency (EQE) per atom as a function of excitation wavelength for different populations of Au (11 nm, pink; 34 nm, purple) and Pt (9 nm, cyan; 33 nm, teal) nanoislands. (b) Calculated number of generated hot electrons above Schottky ba… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

5 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Plasmonic Metal –Semiconductor Photocatalysts and Photoelectrochemical Cells: A Review

    (1) Wu, N. Plasmonic Metal –Semiconductor Photocatalysts and Photoelectrochemical Cells: A Review. Nanoscale 2018, 10 (6), 2679–2696. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7NR08487K. (2) Wang, J.; Liao, W.; Tan, Y .; Henrotte, O.; Kang, Y .; Liu, K.; Fu, J.; Lin, Z.; Chai, L.; Cortes, E.; Liu, M. Transfer Dynamics of Photo -Generated Carriers in Catalysis. Chemical So...

    work page doi:10.1039/c7nr08487k 2018

  2. [2]

    Computational Materials Science 2018, 151, 160 –173

    Hetero -Structures. Computational Materials Science 2018, 151, 160 –173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2018.05.001. (25) Amirav, L.; Wächtler, M. Nano Schottky? Nano Lett. 2022, 22 (24), 9783 –9785. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.2c04150. (26) Henrotte, O.; Santiago, E. Y .; Movsesyan, A.; Mascaretti, L.; Afshar, M.; Minguzzi, A.; Vertova, A.;...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.commatsci.2018.05.001 2018

  3. [3]

    (33) Schierbaum, K

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-79746-5. (33) Schierbaum, K. D.; Fischer, S.; Torquemada, M. C.; de Segovia, J. L.; Román, E.; Martín- Gago, J. A. The Interaction of Pt with TiO2(110) Surfaces: A Comparative XPS, UPS, ISS, and ESD Study. Surface Science 1996, 345 (3), 261 –273. https://doi.org/10.1016/0039- 6028(95)00887-X. (34) Du, L.; Furube, A.; Har...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-020-79746-5 1996

  4. [4]

    (42) CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 95th ed.; Haynes, W

    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8264-3. (42) CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 95th ed.; Haynes, W. M., Ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton,

    work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-8264-3

  5. [5]

    https://doi.org/10.1201/b17118

    work page doi:10.1201/b17118

Pith tools

Reviewed July 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.