4.8 Article

Unraveling the controversy over a catalytic reaction mechanism using a new theoretical methodology: One probe and non-equilibrium surface Green's function

期刊

NANO ENERGY
卷 63, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.nanoen.2019.103863

关键词

One-probe; Surface Green's function; Iodine reduction reaction; Electric field; Catalytic activity; Density functional theory

资金

  1. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Science, ICT, and Future Planning [2018R1A2B6006320]
  2. Creative Materials Discovery Program on Creative Multilevel Research Center [2018M3D1A1057844]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [2018R1A2B6006320] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We propose a new methodology called one probe and non-equilibrium surface Green's function (OPNS) to elucidate the longstanding controversial issue of a catalytic reaction mechanism, especially iodine reduction reaction (IRR) mechanisms. With aid of OPNS overcoming the limitations of conventional approach based on the free energy diagram and theoretical slab model, we clearly elucidate that the IRR follows a consecutive mechanism where the configurational preference of approaching I-2 molecules depending on the external electric field governs the IRR mechanism. Under reductive potential, I-2 molecules prefer a vertical configuration (I2V) rather than a parallel configuration (I2P), which leads to the consecutive mechanism where I atoms are sequentially reduced due to asymmetric charge accumulation on a single I atom that is subsequently desorbed. In addition, we provide new convincing descriptors for catalytic activity evaluation, the slope of the linear relation between the reductive process and the electric field strength representing the ability of the partial reduction and the threshold electric field of minimum required potential for the complete reduction.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据