4.8 Article

Discovery of Graphene Growth Alloy Catalysts Using High-Throughput Machine Learning

期刊

NANO LETTERS
卷 23, 期 21, 页码 9796-9802

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.3c02496

关键词

graphene; catalyst; alloy; chemicalvapor deposition; machine learning

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the current challenges in commercial-scale graphene production using chemical vapor deposition (CVD), this study introduces a new approach combining high-throughput density functional theory and machine learning to identify new prospective catalyst materials with comparable performance to established catalysts. The approach discovered combinations of early- and late-transition metals, including unconventional partners like Zr, Hf, and Nb. This study highlights the importance of finding novel catalyst materials for CVD growth of low-dimensional nanomaterials.
Despite today's commercial-scale graphene production using chemical vapor deposition (CVD), the growth of high-quality single-layer graphene with controlled morphology and crystallinity remains challenging. Considerable effort is still spent on designing improved CVD catalysts for producing high-quality graphene. Conventionally, however, catalyst design has been pursued using empirical intuition or trial-and-error approaches. Here, we combine high-throughput density functional theory and machine learning to identify new prospective transition metal alloy catalysts that exhibit performance comparable to that of established graphene catalysts, such as Ni(111) and Cu(111). The alloys identified through this process generally consist of combinations of early- and late-transition metals, and a majority are alloys of Ni or Cu. Nevertheless, in many cases, these conventional catalyst metals are combined with unconventional partners, such as Zr, Hf, and Nb. The approach presented here therefore highlights an important new approach for identifying novel catalyst materials for the CVD growth of low-dimensional nanomaterials.

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