4.8 Review

Tuning the Coordination Environment of Carbon-Based Single-Atom Catalysts via Doping with Multiple Heteroatoms and Their Applications in Electrocatalysis

期刊

ADVANCED MATERIALS
卷 35, 期 38, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/adma.202210575

关键词

coordination environment; electrocatalysis; heteroatoms doping; single-atom catalysts

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article summarizes recently developed strategies for multi-heteroatom doping in carbon-based single-atom catalysts (SACs), with a focus on regulating single-atom active sites through heteroatoms in different coordination shells to enhance catalytic performance. The correlation between the coordination environment and catalytic activity of carbon-based SACs is investigated through experiments and theoretical calculations for various electrochemical reactions. Suggestions are also presented to promote the development of carbon-based SACs in the field of electrocatalysis.
Carbon-based single-atom catalysts (SACs) are considered to be a perfect platform for studying the structure-activity relationship of different reactions due to the adjustability of their coordination environment. Multi-heteroatom doping has been demonstrated as an effective strategy for tuning the coordination environment of carbon-based SACs and enhancing catalytic performance in electrochemical reactions. Herein, recently developed strategies for multi-heteroatom doping, focusing on the regulation of single-atom active sites by heteroatoms in different coordination shells, are summarized. In addition, the correlation between the coordination environment and the catalytic activity of carbon-based SACs are investigated through representative experiments and theoretical calculations for various electrochemical reactions. Finally, concerning certain shortcomings of the current strategies of doping multi-heteroatoms, some suggestions are put forward to promote the development of carbon-based SACs in the field of electrocatalysis.

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