铂基金属间化合物纳米晶的最新进展：可控合成与电催化应用

doi:10.3866/PKU.WHXB202003047

物理化学学报 >> 2020, Vol. 36 >> Issue (9): 2003047.doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB202003047

所属专题：精准纳米合成

铂基金属间化合物纳米晶的最新进展：可控合成与电催化应用

杨天怡¹, 崔铖¹, 戎宏盼¹^,*(), 张加涛¹, 王定胜²^,*()

¹ 北京理工大学材料学院，结构可控先进功能材料与绿色应用北京市重点实验室，北京 100081
² 清华大学化学系，北京 100084

收稿日期:2020-03-19 录用日期:2020-04-17 发布日期:2020-04-24
通讯作者: 戎宏盼,王定胜 E-mail:rhp@bit.edu.cn;wangdingsheng@mail.tsinghua.edu.cn
作者简介:戎宏盼，2015年获清华大学博士学位；现任北京理工大学材料学院特别副研究员。主要从事金属纳米材料的制备与应用、单原子材料制备及电催化性能研究|王定胜，2009年获清华大学化学系博士学位；国家优秀青年基金获得者，现任清华大学化学系副教授，博导。主要从事纳米材料制备与性能、金属纳米催化研究
基金资助:
北京理工大学青年教师学术启动计划;中国国家重点研发计划(2018YFA0702003);中国国家重点研发计划(2016YFA0202801);国家自然科学基金(51631001);国家自然科学基金(51872030);国家自然科学基金(51702016);国家自然科学基金(51902023);国家自然科学基金(21801015);国家自然科学基金(21890383);国家自然科学基金(21671117);国家自然科学基金(21871159);北京市科学技术委员会(Z191100007219003)

Recent Advances in Platinum-based Intermetallic Nanocrystals: Controlled Synthesis and Electrocatalytic Applications

Tianyi Yang¹, Cheng Cui¹, Hongpan Rong¹^,*(), Jiatao Zhang¹, Dingsheng Wang²^,*()

¹ Beijing Key Laboratory of Construction-Tailorable Advanced Functional Materials and Green Applications, School of Materials Science & Engineering, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, P. R. China
² Department of Chemistry, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, P. R. China

Received:2020-03-19 Accepted:2020-04-17 Published:2020-04-24
Contact: Hongpan Rong,Dingsheng Wang E-mail:rhp@bit.edu.cn;wangdingsheng@mail.tsinghua.edu.cn
Supported by:
The project was supported by the Beijing Institute of Technology Research Fund Program for Young Scholars, China;the National Key R&D Program of China(2018YFA0702003);the National Key R&D Program of China(2016YFA0202801);the National Natural Science Foundation of China(51631001);the National Natural Science Foundation of China(51872030);the National Natural Science Foundation of China(51702016);the National Natural Science Foundation of China(51902023);the National Natural Science Foundation of China(21801015);the National Natural Science Foundation of China(21890383);the National Natural Science Foundation of China(21671117);the National Natural Science Foundation of China(21871159);the Beijing Municipal Science & Technology Commission, China(Z191100007219003)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

铂基金属间化合物纳米晶因其高度有序的结构特点，优异的抗氧化及耐腐蚀性能，作为电极材料被广泛应用于各类电催化反应，目前已有的PtCo金属间化合物纳米晶在燃料电池阴极反应(氧还原反应)中的活性和稳定性均达到了美国能源部(DOE) 2020年的目标。为了进一步提高金属间化合物纳米晶的电催化性能，需要对影响纳米晶电催化性能的因素进行深入研究。本文综述了铂基金属间化合物纳米晶的研究现状，着重介绍了铂基金属间化合物的可控合成策略及其在电催化领域的最新研究进展，分析总结了该领域存在的问题，并展望了其未来发展方向。

关键词: 铂基金属间化合物, 纳米晶, 可控合成, 结构有序, 电催化反应

Abstract:

Fuel cells, whose energy source can be hydrogen, formic acid, methanol, or ethanol, have received considerable attention in recent years because of their environmentally friendly characteristics. A high Pt loading is often required to achieve a practical power density in fuel cells, thus leading to high costs and limited applications. Meanwhile, the high Pt loading promotes aggregation during cycling under harsh electrocatalytic conditions, which reduces the surface area of the catalyst and leads to a decrease in catalytic activity. The formation of alloy or intermetallic nanocrystals via the addition of non-precious metals along with precious metals is one strategy to effectively reduce the cost. Due to the electronic and geometric effects introduced by the non-precious metals, the catalytic performance of these bimetallic nanocrystals can be retained or even improved. Compared to the metallic alloy nanocrystals, the intermetallic ones are more stable in critical catalytic conditions. Due to their highly ordered structures, Pt-based intermetallic nanocrystals are widely used as electrode materials for various electrocatalytic reactions in fuel cells, and they show high stability against oxidation and etching. PtCo intermetallic nanocrystals have attained performances that exceed the 2020 target of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for Pt activity and stability for the cathode reaction of fuel cells (oxygen reduction reaction). Decreasing the size of intermetallic compounds to the nanometer scale can significantly increase their active site densities due to the large specific surface area. However, the preparation of intermetallic nanocrystals is more complicated than that of alloys. Therefore, to further improve the electrocatalytic properties of intermetallic nanocrystals, an in-depth study of the factors affecting the electrocatalytic properties of nanocrystals is necessary. This review summarizes recent advances in Pt-based intermetallic nanocrystals. First, we highlight the controlled synthesis strategies, including direct liquid-phase synthesis, the thermal annealing approach, and chemical vapor deposition. Of these strategies, direct liquid-phase synthesis is the most common approach to prepare the intermetallic nanocrystals. Second, the diverse potential applications of different electrocatalytic reactions are summarized. The reactions include the hydrogen evolution reaction (HER), oxygen reduction reaction (ORR), and hydrogen oxidation reaction (HOR), as well as the oxidation reactions of formic acid (FAOR), methanol (MOR), and ethanol (EtOR). Of these reactions, ORR is the most important, and it has been widely studied. Some advanced characterization techniques and machine learning research based on density functional theory (DFT) are also mentioned. Finally, the challenges and the future perspectives of intermetallic nanocrystals are outlined.

Key words: Platinum-based intermetallic compounds, Nanocrystals, Controlled synthesis, Structure-ordered, Electrocatalytic reactions

杨天怡, 崔铖, 戎宏盼, 张加涛, 王定胜. 铂基金属间化合物纳米晶的最新进展：可控合成与电催化应用[J]. 物理化学学报, 2020, 36(9), 2003047. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB202003047

Tianyi Yang, Cheng Cui, Hongpan Rong, Jiatao Zhang, Dingsheng Wang. Recent Advances in Platinum-based Intermetallic Nanocrystals: Controlled Synthesis and Electrocatalytic Applications[J]. Acta Physico-Chimica Sinica 2020, 36(9), 2003047. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB202003047

链接本文: https://www.whxb.pku.edu.cn/CN/10.3866/PKU.WHXB202003047

https://www.whxb.pku.edu.cn/CN/Y2020/V36/I9/2003047

图/表 13

表1

表2

图1

图2

图3

图4

表3

近年在各类电催化反应中性能优异的铂基金属间化合物催化剂的电化学性能"

	Ref.	Pt (w, %)	Main catalytic performances					Electrolyte/(mol?L^?1)
	Ref.	Pt (w, %)	η/(mV@10 mA?cm^?2) vs RHE	Tafel slope/(mV?decade^?1)	SA/(mA?cm^?2)	MA/(A?mg^?1)	Cycling tests	Electrolyte/(mol?L^?1)
HER	Lim, 2019	86.72	27	43.3	145.2 @ 50 mV	0.55 @ 50 mV	Retain ~95% in current	0.5 H₂SO₄
	Pt₃Ga ⁶⁸	(ICP-MS)					density (10000 cycle)
	^#Li, 2019	1	32.7	32.3	17.17 @ 50 mV	1.305 @ 50 mV	The η reduced by 2.3 mV (2000 cycle)	0.1 HClO₄
	Pt/Ti₃C₂T_x ⁶¹	(ICP-MS)
	^#Lim, 2019	76.4	53	37	56.2 @ ?0.1 V	0.3678 @ ?0.1 V	No obvious loss of performance (10000 cycle)	0.5 H₂SO₄
	Pt₃Ge ⁶⁹	(ICP-MS)
	Maccio, 2005,	–	150	121	–	/	–	1 NaOH
	PtHo ⁷⁰
	^*Pt black,	–	30	47.6	137.6 @ 50 mV	0.45 @ 50 mV	–	0.5 H₂SO₄
	7440-06-4 ⁶⁸
	^*Pt/C, 599002 ⁶⁸	20	31	51.4	104.1 @ 50 mV	1.7 @ 50 mV	The η reduced by 7 mV (10000 cycle) ⁵⁷	0.5 H₂SO₄
	^*commercial Pt/Vulcan ⁶¹	20	55.8	–	1.79 @ 50 mV	0.397 @ 50 mV	–	0.1 HClO₄
	Ref.	Pt : M	HOR onset potential/V	Tafel slope/(mV?decade^?1)	CO-tolerance		Cycling tests	Electrolyte
HOR	^#Liu, 2011	Pt : Fe =	0 V vs SCE (1000 ppm CO, balance H₂)	–	Exhibit sharp CO oxidation peaks		No obvious loss of catalytic performance (500 cycles)	0.5 H₂SO₄
	Pt₃Fe@Pt ⁹⁰	63 : 37
	Innocente 2007,	Pt : Sb =	–	57	CO-covered PtSb surfaces achieved current densities higher than equivalent Pt surfaces		–	0.15 HClO₄
	PtSb ⁸⁹	1 : 1
	Ref.	Pt (w, %)	Half-wave potential/V vs RHE	Electrochemical active surface area/(m²?g^?1)	SA/(mA?cm^?2)	MA/(A?mg^?1) @ 0.9 V	Cycling tests	Electrolyte/(mol?L^?1)
ORR	^#Li, 2019, L1₀-CoPt@Pt ²²	8 (ICP-MS)	–	26.4	8.26 @ 0.9 V	2.26	18% MA loss (30000 cycles)	0.1 HClO₄
	^#Wang, 2018	–	0.92	45	5.1 @ 0.85 V	1.15	Half wave potential loss	0.1 HClO₄
	Pt₃Co ⁷⁴						12 mV (30000 cycles)
	^#Xiao, 2018	–	–	–	–	4.93	Half wave potential loss	0.1 HClO₄
	PdFe@Pt ⁸⁰						6 mV (10000 cycles)
	^#Kuttiyiel, 2018,	–	0.9	–	0.53 @ 0.9 V	0.68	Half wave potential loss	0.1 HClO₄
	L1₀-AuPtCo@Pt ⁷⁸						7 mV (10000 cycles)
	^#Xiong, 2018,	35.49	0.943	51	1.1 @ 0.9 V	0.5	Half wave potential loss	0.1 HClO₄
	Pt₃Co/C ⁷⁶	(TGA)					25 mV (4000 cycles)
	^#Wang, 2017,	–	–	58.8	4.33 @ 0.9 V	2.55	15.4% loss of	0.1 HClO₄
	PdCuB₂@Pt-Cu ³⁰						activity(10000 cycles)
	^#Bu, 2016,	–	–	55	7.8 @ 0.9 V	4.3	7.7% loss of mass activity	0.1 HClO₄
	PtPb@Pt ⁴³						(50000 cycles)
	^#Chung, 2015, fct-	–	–	–	2.3 @ 0.9 V	1.6	A little ESCA is lost	0.1 HClO₄
	PtFe@N-C ⁶⁷						(10000 cycles)
	^#Li, 2015, fct?FePt ⁵⁷	–	0.927	–	3.16 @ 0.9 V	0.69	Fe : Pt ratio reduced from	0.5 H₂SO₄
							50 : 50 to 47 : 53
							(20000 cycles)
	^#Wang, 2014, AuCu@Pt ⁷⁹	2.8 (XRF)	–	–	0.37 @ 0.9 V	0.56	29% MA loss	0.1 HClO₄
							(10000 cycles)
	^#Na, 2008,	9.3 (TGA)	0.791	129.4	–	0.296	11% MA loss	0.1 HClO₄
	Pt/ITO/CB ⁶⁶						(3000 cycles)
	Ref.	Pt (w, %)	Main catalytic performances					Electrolyte/(mol?L^?1)
	Ref.	Pt (w, %)	η/(mV@10 mA?cm^?2) vs RHE	Tafel slope/(mV?decade^?1)	SA/(mA?cm^?2)	MA/(A?mg^?1)	Cycling tests	Electrolyte/(mol?L^?1)
FAOR	^*Commercial Pt/C ²¹	–	–	–	0.22 @ 0.9 V	0.12	85% MA loss	0.1 HClO₄
							(30000 cycles)
	^*Pt/C Tanaka Kikinzoku ⁷⁸	46.6	0.86	–	0.25 @ 0.9 V	0.22	Half wave potential loss	0.1 HClO₄
							12 mV (10000 cycles)
	^*Pt/C(Johnson Matthey Co.) ⁶⁷	20	–	–	0.22 @ 0.9 V	0.14	The ESCA decreased significantly (10000 cycles)	0.1 HClO₄
	^*Pt catalyst	18.6	0.872	81.8	–	> 0.9	Half wave potential loss	0.1 HClO₄
	(HiSPEC 2000) ⁶⁶						65 mV (3000 cycles)
	^#Rong, 2016, Pt₃Sn ²⁶	–	–	5.1	27.6	1.7	lost about 5% of initial peak current density,	0.1 HClO₄
	^#Zhang, 2012, fct-FePtAu ⁵⁸	–	?0.2 vs Ag/AgCl	–	–	2.8099	Retain 92.5% of this MA(13 h)	0.5 H₂SO₄
	^#Abe, 2008, Pt₃Ti ³⁵	–	0.05 vs Ag/AgCl	–	–	–	–	0.1 H₂SO₄
	^*Commercial Pt/C ²⁶	20	–	70.9	–	–	Lost about 80% of initial peak current density	0.1 HClO₄
	Ref.	Pt (w, %)	Oxidation onset potential/V	Electrochemical active surface area/(m²?g^?1)	SA/(mA?cm^?2)	MA/(A?mg^?1)	Cycling tests	Electrolyte/(mol?L^?1)
MOR	^#Wang, 2019,	–	0.39 vs RHE	53	1.3	0.69	–	0.1 HClO₄
	PtFe@PtRuFe ³³
	^#Feng, 2019,	–	–	–	7.195	1.09	The loss of peak current density is negligible	0.5 H₂SO₄
	₃Ga@Pt ⁴⁴						(1000 cycles)
	^#Feng, 2017,	/	/	60.5	–	–	–	0.1 HClO₄
	Au@Ag₂S@Pt 102
	^#Qi, 2017,	/	0.154 vs Ag/AgCl	–	1.08	0.612	3% SA loss	0.5 H₂SO₄
	PtZn/MWNT ³¹						(1000 cycles)
	^*Commercial Pt/C(JM) ³³	20	0.83 vs RHE	71	0.15	0.11	–	0.1 HClO₄
	^*Commercial PtRu/C ³³	/	0.43 vs RHE	49	0.83	0.41	–	0.1 HClO₄
	^*Commercial	/	0.247 vs Ag/AgCl	–	–	–	50% SA loss	0.5 H₂SO₄
	Pt/Vulcan ³¹						(1000 cycles)
	Ref.	Pt (w, %)	Oxidation onset potential/V	Completely oxidizes ethanol to CO₂	SA/(mA?cm^?2)	MA/(A?mg^?1)	Cycling tests	Electrolyte/(mol?L^?1)
EtOR	^#Yuan, 2018, PtBi@Pt³²	–	–	–	136.5 vs RHE	5.95	No significant change in the size and shape (10000 s)	1 NaOH
	^#Zhang, 2016, Pt₃Co@Pt ¹⁰⁴	–	–	No	–	0.79	–	0.1 HClO₄
	^#Kodiyath, 2015, Pt₃Ta ¹¹¹	–	0.27 V vs Ag/AgCl	Yes	–	–	Retain 85% in ESCA (10000 cycles)	0.5 H₂SO₄
	^*Commercial	20	–	–	22.2 vs RHE	0.689	Serious aggregation	1 NaOH
	Pt/C ³²						(10000 s)

表3

图5

图6

图7

图8

图9

图10

参考文献 121

1	Dunn B. ; Kamath H. ; Tarascon J. M. Science 2011, 334, 928. doi: 10.1126/science.1212741
2	Xu Q. ; Guo C. ; Tian S. ; Zhang J. ; Chen W. ; Cheong W. ; Gu L. ; Zheng L. ; Xiao J. ; Liu Q. ; et al Sci. China Mater. 2020. doi: 10.1007/s40843-020-1334-6
3	Xiong Y. ; Dong J. ; Zheng Q. ; Xin P. ; Chen W. ; Wang Y. ; Li Z. ; Jin Z. ; Xing W. ; Zhuang Z. ; et al Nat. Nanotechnol. 2020. doi: 10.1038/s41565-020-0665-x
4	Li X. ; Rong H. ; Zhang J. ; Wang D. ; Li Y. Nano Res. 2020. doi: 10.1007/s12274-020-2755-3
5	Sun T. ; Xu L. ; Wang D. ; Li Y. Nano Res. 2019, 12, 2067. doi: 10.1007/s12274-019-2345-4
6	Huang L. ; Jiang Z. ; Gong W. ; Shen P. K. Appl. Nano Mater. 2018, 1, 5019. doi: 10.1021/acsanm.8b01113
7	Huang L. ; Zhang X. ; Wang Q. ; Han Y. ; Fang Y. ; Dong S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2018, 140, 1142. doi: 10.1021/jacs.7b12353
8	Xue S. ; Deng W. ; Yang F. ; Yang J. ; Amiinu I. S. ; He D. ; Tang H. ; Mu S. ACS Catal. 2018, 8, 7578. doi: 10.1021/acscatal.8b00366
9	US Department of Energy. (2018). DOE technical targets for polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell components. https://www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/doe-technicaltargets-polymer-electrolyte-membrane-fuelcell-components
10	Fu K. ; Zeng L. ; Liu J. ; Liu M. ; Li S. ; Guo W. ; Gao Y. ; Pan M. J. Alloys Compd. 2020, 815, 152374. doi: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2019.152374
11	Liu L. ; Corma A. Chem. Rev. 2018, 118, 4981. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.7b00776
12	Robinson J. E. ; Labrador N. Y. ; Chen H. ; Sartor B. E. ; Esposito D. V. ACS Catal. 2018, 8, 11423. doi: 10.1021/acscatal.8b03626
13	Wu, Z.; Bukowski, B. C.; Li, Z.; Milligan, C.; Zhou, L.; Ma, T.; Wu, Y.; Ren, Y.; Ribeiro, F. H.; Delgass, W. N.; et al. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2018, 140, 14870. doi: 10.1021/jacs.8b08162
14	Zhao X. ; Liu X. ; Huang B. ; Wang P. ; Pei Y. J. Mater. Chem. A 2019, 7, 24583. doi: 10.1039/c9ta08661g
15	Xiao W. ; Lei W. ; Gong M. ; Xin H. L. ; Wang D. ACS Catal. 2018, 8, 3237. doi: 10.1021/acscatal.7b04420
16	Li J. ; Sun S. Acc. Chem. Res. 2019, 52, 2015. doi: 10.1021/acs.accounts.9b00172
17	Karamad M. ; Tripkovic V. ; Rossmeisl J. ACS Catal. 2014, 4, 2268. doi: 10.1021/cs500328c
18	Zhu Y. ; Yuan M. ; Deng L. ; Ming R. ; Zhang A. ; Yang M. ; Chai B. ; Ren Z. RSC Adv. 2017, 7, 1553. doi: 10.1039/c6ra24754g
19	Magno L. M. ; Sigle W. ; van Aken P. A. ; Angelescu D. ; Stubenrauch C. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2011, 13, 9134. doi: 10.1039/c1cp20159j
20	Wang C. ; Sang X. ; Gamler J. T. L. ; Chen D. P. ; Unocic R. R. ; Skrabalak S. E. Nano Lett. 2017, 17, 5526. doi: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.7b02239
21	Thompson S. T. ; James B. D. ; Huya-Kouadio J. M. ; Houchins C. ; DeSantis D. A. ; Ahluwalia R. ; Wilson A. R. ; Kleen G. ; Papageorgopoulos D. J. Power Sources 2018, 399, 304. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2018.07.100
22	Li J. ; Sharma S. ; Liu X. ; Pan Y. ; Spendelow J. S. ; Chi M. ; Jia Y. ; Zhang P. ; Cullen D. A. ; Cullen D. A. ; Xi Z. ; et al Joule 2019, 3, 124. doi: 10.1016/j.joule.2018.09.016
23	Wang X. X. ; Swihart M. T. ; Wu G. Nat. Catal. 2019, 2, 578. doi: 10.1038/s41929-019-0304-9
24	Bortoloti F. ; Garcia A. C. ; Angelo A. C. D. Int. J. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2015, 40, 10816. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.06.145
25	Santos E. ; Pinto L. M. C. ; Soldano G. ; Innocente A. F. ; Ângelo A. C. D. ; Schmickler W. Catal. Today 2013, 202, 191. doi: 10.1016/j.cattod.2012.07.044
26	Rong H. ; Mao J. ; Xin P. ; He D. ; Chen Y. ; Wang D. ; Niu Z. ; Wu Y. ; Li Y. Adv. Mater. 2016, 28, 2540. doi: 10.1002/adma.201504831
27	Russell A. E. Faraday Discuss. 2008, 140, 9. doi: 10.1039/b814058h
28	You G. ; Jiang J. ; Li M. ; Li L. ; Tang D. ; Zhang J. ; Zeng X. C. ; He R. ACS Catal. 2017, 8, 132. doi: 10.1021/acscatal.7b02698
29	Cui Z. ; Chen H. ; Zhao M. ; Marshall D. ; Yu Y. ; Abruna H. ; DiSalvo F. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014, 136, 29. doi: 10.1021/ja504573a
30	Liao H. ; Zhu J. ; Hou Y. Nanoscale 2014, 6, 1049. doi: 10.1039/c3nr05590f
31	Qi Z. ; Xiao C. ; Liu C. ; Goh T. W. ; Zhou L. ; Maligal-Ganesh R. ; Pei Y. ; Li X. ; Curtiss L. A. ; Huang W. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2017, 139, 4762. doi: 10.1021/jacs.6b12780
32	Yuan X. ; Jiang X. ; Cao M. ; Chen L. ; Nie K. ; Zhang Y. ; Xu Y. ; Sun X. ; Li Y. ; Zhang Q. Nano Res. 2018, 12, 429. doi: 10.1007/s12274-018-2234-2
33	Wang Q. ; Chen S. ; Li P. ; Ibraheem S. ; Li J. ; Deng J. ; Wei Z. Appl. Catal., B 2019, 252, 120. doi: 10.1016/j.apcatb.2019.04.023
34	Furukawa S. ; Komatsu T. ACS Catal. 2017, 7, 735. doi: 10.1021/acscatal.6b02603
35	Abe H. ; Matsumoto F. ; Alden L. R. ; Warren S. C. ; Abruña H. D. ; DiSalvo F. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 5452. doi: 10.1021/ja075061c
36	Yan Y. ; Du J. S. ; Gilroy K. D. ; Yang D. ; Xia Y. ; Zhang H. Adv. Mater. 2017, 29, 1605997. doi: 10.1002/adma.201605997
37	Wang D. ; Peng Q. ; Li Y. Nano Res. 2010, 3, 574. doi: 10.1007/s12274-010-0018-4
38	Chen Q. L. ; Zhang J. W. ; Jia Y. Y. ; Jiang Z. Y. ; Xie Z. X. ; Zheng L. S. Nanoscale 2014, 6, 7019. doi: 10.1039/c4nr00313f
39	Dong H. ; Chen Y. C. ; Feldmann C. Green Chem. 2015, 17, 4107. doi: 10.1039/c5gc00943j
40	Teichert J. ; Heise M. ; Chang J. H. ; Ruck M. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. 2017, 42, 4930. doi: 10.1002/ejic.201700966
41	Chen W. ; Lei Z. ; Zeng T. ; Wang L. ; Cheng N. C. ; Tan Y. Y. ; Mu S. C. Nanoscale 2019, 11, 19895. doi: 10.1039/c9nr07245d
42	Bauer J. C. ; Chen X. ; Liu Q. S. ; Phan T. H. ; Schaak R. E. J. Mater. Chem. 2008, 18, 275. doi: 10.1039/b712035d
43	Bu L. ; Zhang N. ; Guo S. ; Zhang X. ; Li J. ; Yao J. ; Wu T. ; Lu G. ; Ma J. ; Su D. ; et al Science 2016, 354, 1410. doi: 10.1126/science.aah6133
44	Feng Q. ; Zhao S. ; He D. ; Tian S. ; Gu L. ; Wen X. ; Chen C. ; Peng Q. ; Wang D. ; Li Y. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2018, 140, 2773. doi: 10.1021/jacs.7b13612
45	Luo S. ; Chen W. ; Cheng Y. ; Song X. ; Wu Q. ; Li L. ; Wu X. ; Wu T. ; Li M. ; Yang Q. ; et al Adv. Mater. 2019, 31, 1903683. doi: 10.1002/adma.201903683
46	Kim J. ; Lee Y. ; Sun S. H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132, 14. doi: 10.1021/ja1009629
47	Gamler J. T. L. ; Ashberry H. M. ; Skrabalak S. E. ; Koczkur K. M. Adv. Mater. 2018, 30, 40. doi: 10.1002/adma.201801563
48	Li J. ; Xi Z. ; Pan Y. ; Spendelow Jacob S. ; Duchesne Paul N. ; Su D. ; Li Q. ; Yu C. ; Yin Z. ; Shen B. ; et al J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2018, 140, 2926. doi: 10.1021/jacs.7b12829
49	Wang D. ; Xin H. L. ; Hovden R. ; Wang H. ; Yu Y. ; Muller D. A. ; DiSalvo F. J. ; Abruña H. D. Nat. Mater. 2012, 12, 81. doi: 10.1038/nmat3458
50	Shim J. ; Lee J. ; Ye Y. ; Hwang J. ; Kim S. K. ; Lim T. H. ; Wiesner U. ; Lee J. ACS Nano 2012, 6, 8. doi: 10.1021/nn301692y
51	Zhang B.-W. ; Jiang Y.-X. ; Ren J. ; Qu X. -M. ; Xu G.-L. ; Sun S. -G. Electrochim. Acta 2015, 162, 254. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2014.09.159
52	Zhang G. ; Yang Z. ; Zhang W. ; Hu H. ; Wang C. ; Huang C. ; Wang Y. Nanoscale 2016, 8, 3075. doi: 10.1039/c5nr08013d
53	Kim J. ; Rong C. ; Liu J. P. ; Sun S. Adv. Mater. 2009, 21, 906. doi: 10.1002/adma.200801620
54	Kim J. ; Rong C. ; Lee Y. ; Liu J. P. ; Sun S. Chem. Mater. 2008, 20, 7242. doi: 10.1021/cm8024878
55	Yu J. ; Gao W. ; Liu F. ; Ju Y. ; Zhao F. ; Yang Z. ; Chu X. ; Che S. ; Hou Y. Sci. China Mater. 2018, 61, 961. doi: 10.1007/s40843-017-9203-9
56	Han A. ; Zhang J. ; Sun W. ; Chen W. ; Zhang S. ; Hang Y. ; Feng Q. ; Zheng L. ; Gu L. ; Chen C. ; et al Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 3787. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-11794-6
57	Li Q. ; Wu L. ; Wu G. ; Su D. ; Lu H. ; Zhang S. ; Zhu W. ; Casimir A. ; Zhu H. ; Mendoza-Garcia A. ; et al Nano Lett. 2015, 15, 2468. doi: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.5b00320
58	Zhang S. ; Guo S. ; Zhu H. ; Su D. ; Sun S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012, 134, 5060. doi: 10.1021/ja300708j
59	Zhang S. ; Zhang X. ; Jiang G. ; Zhu H. ; Guo S. ; Su D. ; Lu G. ; Sun S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014, 136, 7734. doi: 10.1021/ja5030172
60	Bernal S. ; Calvino J. J. ; Gatica J. M. ; Larese C. ; López-Cartes C. ; Pérez-Omil J. A. J. Catal. 1997, 169, 510. doi: 10.1006/jcat.1997.1707
61	Li Z. ; Qi Z. ; Wang S. ; Ma T. ; Zhou L. ; Wu Z. ; Luan X. ; Lin F. ; Chen M. ; Miller J. ; et al Nano Lett. 2019, 19, 5102. doi: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b01381
62	Huang L. L. ; Liu M. ; Lin H. X. ; Xu Y. B. ; Wu J. S. ; Dravid V. P. ; Wolverton C. ; Mirkin C. A. Science 2019, 365, 1159. doi: 10.1126/science.aax5843
63	Komatsu T. ; Mesuda M. ; Yashima T. Appl. Catal. A 2000, 194, 333. doi: 10.1016/S0926-860X(99)00379-8
64	Saedy S. ; Palagin D. ; Safonova O. ; van Bokhoven J. A. ; Khodadadi A. A. ; Mortazavi Y. J. Mater. Chem. A 2017, 5, 24396. doi: 10.1039/C7TA06737B
65	Geisler A. H. ; Martin D. L. J. Appl. Phys. 1952, 23, 375. doi: 10.1063/1.1702216
66	Na H. ; Choi H. ; Oh J. W. ; Jung Y. S. ; Cho Y. S. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2019, 11, 25179. doi: 10.1021/acsami.9b06159
67	Chung D. ; Jun S. ; Yoon G. ; Kwon S. ; Shin D. ; Seo P. ; Yoo J. ; Shin H. ; Chung Y. ; Kim H. ; et al J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2015, 137, 15478. doi: 10.1021/jacs.5b09653
68	Lim S. C. ; Chan C. Y. ; Chen K. T. ; Tuan H. Y. Electrochim. Acta 2019, 297, 288. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2018.11.152
69	Lim S. C. ; Hsiao M. C. ; Lu M. D. ; Tung Y. L. ; Tuan H. Y. Nanoscale 2018, 10, 16657. doi: 10.1039/c8nr03983f
70	Maccio D. ; Rosalbino F. ; Saccone A. ; Delfino S. J. Alloys Compd. 2005, 391, 60. doi: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2004.08.050
71	Strasser P. ; Kuhl S. Nano Energy 2016, 29, 166. doi: 10.1016/j.nanoen.2016.04.047
72	Rößner L. ; Armbrüster M. ACS Catal. 2019, 9, 2018. doi: 10.1021/acscatal.8b04566
73	Leidheiser H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1949, 71, 3634. doi: 10.1021/ja01179a015
74	Wang X. X. ; Hwang S. ; Pan Y. T. ; Chen K. ; He Y. H. ; Karakalos S. ; Zhang H. G. ; Spendelow J. S. ; Su D. ; Wu G. Nano Lett. 2018, 18, 4163. doi: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.8b00978
75	Gokhale R. ; Chen Y. C. ; Serov A. ; Artyushkova K. ; Atanassov P. Electrochim. Acta 2017, 224, 49. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2016.12.052
76	Xiong Y. ; Xiao L. ; Yang Y. ; DiSalvo F. J. ; Abruna H. D. Chem. Mater. 2018, 30, 1532. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemmater.7b04201
77	Zhu H. ; Luo M. C. ; Cai Y. Z. ; Sun Z. N. Acta Phys. -Chim. Sin. 2016, 32, 2462.
	朱红; 骆明川; 蔡业政; 孙照男. 物理化学学报, 2016, 32, 2462. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB201606293
78	Kuttiyiel K. ; Kattel S. ; Cheng S. ; Lee J. ; Wu L. ; Zhu Y. ; Park G. ; Liu P. ; Sasaki K. ; Chen J. ; et al ACS Appl. Energy Mater. 2018, 1, 3771. doi: 10.1021/acsaem.8b00555
79	Wang G. W. ; Huang B. ; Xiao L. ; Ren Z. D. ; Chen H. ; Wang D. L. ; Abruna H. D. ; Lu J. T. ; Zhuang L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2014, 136, 9643. doi: 10.1021/ja503315s
80	Xiao W. ; Cordeiro M. ; Gao G. ; Zheng A. ; Wang J. ; Lei W. ; Gong M. ; Lin R. ; Stavitski E. ; Xin H. ; et al Nano Energy 2018, 50, 70. doi: 10.1016/j.nanoen.2018.05.032
81	Masuda T. ; Fukumitsu H. ; Fugane K. ; Togasaki H. ; Matsumura D. ; Tamura K. ; Matsumura D. ; Tamura K. ; Nishihata Y. ; Yoshikawa H. ; Kobayashi K. ; Mori T. ; et al J. Phys. Chem. C 2012, 116, 10098. doi: 10.1021/jp301509t
82	Sasaki K. ; Zhang L. ; Adzic R. R. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2008, 10, 159. doi: 10.1039/b709893f
83	Wang Y.-J. ; Zhao N. ; Fang B. ; Li H. ; Bi X. T. ; Wang H. Chem. Rev. 2015, 115, 3433. doi: 10.1021/cr500519c
84	Luo M. ; Sun Y. ; Wang L. ; Guo S. Adv. Energy Mater. 2017, 7, 11. doi: 10.1002/aenm.201602073
85	Antolini E. Appl. Catal. B 2017, 217, 201. doi: 10.1016/j.apcatb.2017.05.081
86	Liang J. ; Miao Z. ; Ma F. ; Pan R. ; Chen X. ; Wang T. ; Xie H. ; Li Q. Chin. J. Catal. 2018, 39, 583. doi: 10.1016/S1872-2067(17)62989-9
87	Chen X. ; McCrum I. T. ; Schwarz K. A. ; Janik M. J. ; Koper M. T. M. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2017, 56, 15025. doi: 10.1002/anie.201709455
88	Park E. D. ; Lee D. ; Lee H. C. Catal. Today 2009, 139, 280. doi: 10.1016/j.cattod.2008.06.027
89	Innocente A. F. ; Ângelo A. C. D. J. Power Sources 2008, 175, 779. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2007.10.001
90	Liu Z. ; Jackson G. S. ; Eichhorn B. W. Energy Environ. Sci. 2011, 4, 1900. doi: 10.1039/C1EE01125A
91	Neurock M. ; Janik M. ; Wieckowski A. Faraday Discuss. 2009, 140, 363. doi: 10.1039/B804591G
92	Xu H. ; Yan B. ; Li S. ; Wang J. ; Wang C. ; Guo J. ; Du Y. Chem. Eng. J. 2018, 334, 2638. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2017.10.175
93	Zhu J. ; Zheng X. ; Wang J. ; Wu Z. ; Han L. ; Lin R. ; Xin H. L. ; Wang D. J. Mater. Chem. A 2015, 3, 22129. doi: 10.1039/C5TA05699C
94	Ramesh G. V. ; Kodiyath R. ; Tanabe T. ; Manikandan M. ; Fujita T. ; Umezawa N. ; Ueda S. ; Ishihara S. ; Ariga K. ; Abe H. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2014, 6, 16124. doi: 10.1021/am504147q
95	Ghosh T. ; Zhou Q. ; Gregoire J. M. ; van Dover R. B. ; DiSalvo F. J. J. Phys. Chem. C 2010, 114, 12545. doi: 10.1021/jp101175m
96	Casado-Rivera E. ; Gál Z. ; Angelo A. C. D. ; Lind C. ; DiSalvo F. J. ; Abruña H. D. ChemPhysChem 2003, 4, 193. doi: 10.1002/cphc.200390030
97	Ji X. ; Lee K. T. ; Holden R. ; Zhang L. ; Zhang J. ; Botton G. A. ; Couillard M. ; Nazar L. F. Nat. Chem. 2010, 2, 286. doi: 10.1038/nchem.553
98	Casado-Rivera E. ; Volpe D. J. ; Alden L. ; Lind C. ; Downie C. ; Vázquez-Alvarez T. ; Angelo A. C. D. ; DiSalvo F. J. ; Abruña H. D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 4043. doi: 10.1021/ja038497a
99	Pan Y. -T. ; Yan Y. ; Shao Y. -T. ; Zuo J. -M. ; Yang H. Nano Lett. 2016, 16, 6599. doi: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.6b03302
100	Kang Y. ; Murray C. B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132, 7568. doi: 10.1021/ja100705j
101	Ghosh T. ; Leonard B. M. ; Zhou Q. ; DiSalvo F. J. Chem. Mater. 2010, 22, 2190. doi: 10.1021/cm9018474
102	Feng Y. ; Liu H. ; Yang J. Sci. Adv. 2017, 3, e1700580. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1700580
103	Sanetuntikul J. ; Ketpang K. ; Shanmugam S. ACS Catal. 2015, 5, 7321. doi: 10.1021/acscatal.5b01390
104	Zhang B. ; Sheng T. ; Wang Y. ; Qu X. ; Zhang J. ; Zhang Z. ; Liao H. ; Zhu F. ; Dou S. ; Jiang Y. ; et al ACS Catal. 2017, 7, 892. doi: 10.1021/acscatal.6b03021
105	Mikhailova A. A. ; Pasynskii A. A. ; Grinberg V. A. ; Velikodnyi Y. A. ; Khazova O. A. Russ. J. Electrochem. 2010, 46, 26. doi: 10.1134/s1023193510010039
106	Herranz T. ; Ibáñez M. ; Gómez de la Fuente J. L. ; Pérez-Alonso F. J. ; Peña M. A. ; Cabot A. ; Rojas S. ChemElectroChem 2014, 1, 885. doi: 10.1002/celc.201300254
107	Kwak D.-H. ; Lee Y. -W. ; Han S. -B. ; Hwang E. -T. ; Park H. -C. ; Kim M.-C. ; Park K. -W. J. Power Sources 2015, 275, 557. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2014.11.050
108	Ramesh G. ; Kodiyath R. ; Tanabe T. ; Manikandan M. ; Fujita T. ; Matsumoto F. ; Ishihara S. ; Ueda S. ; Yamashita Y. ; Ariga K. ; et al ChemElectroChem 2014, 1, 728. doi: 10.1002/celc.201300240
109	Sun Y. ; Liang Y. ; Luo M. ; Lv F. ; Qin Y. ; Wang L. ; Xu C. ; Fu E. ; Guo S. Small 2018, 14, 1702259. doi: 10.1002/smll.201702259
110	Gunji T. ; Tanabe T. ; Jeevagan A. J. ; Usui S. ; Tsuda T. ; Kaneko S. ; Saravanan G. ; Abe H. ; Matsumoto F. J. Power Sources 2015, 273, 990. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2014.09.182
111	Kodiyath R. ; Ramesh G. ; Koudelkova E. ; Tanabe T. ; Ito M. ; Manikandan M. ; Ueda S. ; Fujita T. ; Umezawa N. ; Noguchi H. ; et al Energy Environ. Sci. 2015, 8, 1685. doi: 10.1039/C4EE03746D
112	Nia N. S. ; Guillen-Villafuerte O. ; Griesser C. ; Manning G. ; Kunze-Liebhauser J. ; Arevalo C. ; Pastor E. ; Garcia G. ACS Catal. 2020, 10, 1113. doi: 10.1021/acscatal.9b04348
113	Xue X. Z. ; Ge J. J. ; Tian T. ; Liu C. P. ; Xing W. ; Lu T. H. J. Power Sources 2007, 172, 560. doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2007.05.091
114	Gao Z. F. ; Chen H. ; Qi S. T. ; Yin C. H. ; Yang B. L. Acta Phys. -Chim. Sin. 2013, 29, 1900.
	高子丰; 陈昊; 齐随涛; 伊春海; 杨伯伦. 物理化学学报, 2013, 29, 1900. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB201307021
115	Chen C. ; Zuo Y. X. ; Ye W. K. ; Li X. G. ; Deng Z. ; Ong S. P. Adv. Energy Mater. 2020, 10, 1903242. doi: 10.1002/aenm.201903242
116	Chen F. ; Yang Z. Y. ; Wen H. ; Xu Z. H. Acta Phys. -Chim. Sin. 1997, 13, 712.
	陈锋; 杨章远; 温浩; 许志宏. 物理化学学报, 1997, 13, 712. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB19970807
117	Han M. R. ; Zhou Y. N. ; Zhou X. ; Chu W. Acta Phys. -Chim. Sin. 2019, 35, 850.
	韩萌茹; 周亚男; 周旋; 储伟. 物理化学学报, 2019, 35, 850. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB201811040
118	Toyao T. ; Maeno Z. ; Takakusagi S. ; Kamachi T. ; Takigawa I. ; Shimizu K.-I. ACS Catal. 2020, 10, 2260. doi: 10.1021/acscatal.9b04186
119	Li Z. ; Ma X. F. ; Xin H. L. Catal. Today 2017, 280, 232. doi: 10.1016/j.cattod.2016.04.013
120	Li Z. ; Wang S. W. ; Chin W. S. ; Achenie L. E. ; Xin H. L. J. Mater. Chem. A 2017, 5, 24131. doi: 10.1039/c7ta01812f
121	Tran K. ; Ulissi Z. W. Nat. Catal. 2018, 1, 696. doi: 10.1038/s41929-018-0142-1

Characteristic	Units	2020 Targets
Cost	＄·kW^-1	3
Mass activity	A·mg^-1 @ 900 mV	0.44
Loss in initial catalytic activity	% mass activity loss	< 40
Electrocatalyst support stability	% mass activity loss	0.44
Platinum group metal total loading (both electrodes)	mg·cm^-2 electrode area	0.125
Rated power (150 kPa)	mW·cm^-2	1000

Method	Catalysts	Surfactants & solvents	Metal precursor		Reaction time/h	Reaction temperature/℃	Ref.	Year
Method	Catalysts	Surfactants & solvents	A	B	Reaction time/h	Reaction temperature/℃	Ref.	Year
Solvothermal reactions	Pt₃Sn	PVP, DMF	Pt(acac)₂	SnCl₂	6	180	26	2016
	PtZn	PVP, DMF	Pt(acac)₂	Zn(acac)₂	9	180	38	2014
Oil phase synthesis	Pt₄₅Sn₂₅Bi₃₀	ODE, OAm, AA, CTAB	Pt(acac)₂	SnCl₂, Bi(act)₃	1	220	45	2019
	Pt₃Ga@Pt	ODE, OAm	Pt(acac)₂	GaCl₃	12	300	44	2018
	PtPb	ODE, OAm, AA	Pt(acac)₂	Pb(acac)₂	5	160	43	2016
Polyol process	PtSn/ATO	EG	H₂PtCl₆	SnCl₄	3	200	41	2019
	PtBi/Pt	PVP, DEG	Pt(acac)₂	C₃₀H₅₇BiO₆	0.5	150	32	2018
	PtSn	TEG	K₂PtCl₆	SnCl₂	0.5	550	42	2008
	PtPb	TEG	K₂PtCl₆	Pb(C2H3O2)₂	0.5	550	42	2008
	PtBi	TEG	K₂PtCl₆	Bi(NO₃)₃	0.5	550	42	2008
	FePt₃	TEG	K₂PtCl₆	FeCl₃	0.5	550	42	2008
Method	Catalysts	Metal precursor			Reaction time/h	Reaction temperature/℃	Ref.	Year
Method	Catalysts	A		B	Reaction time/h	Reaction temperature/℃	Ref.	Year
Annealing	PtZn/HNCNT	H₂PtCl₆		ZnO	1	800	56	2019
	Pt₃Ti	Pt(NH₃)₄(NO₃)₂		TiH₂	0.5	700	61	2019
	L1₀-CoPt	Pt(acac)₂		Co(acac)₂	6	650	22	2019
	L1₀-FePt	Pt(acac)₂		Fe(CO)₅	6	700	57	2015
	FeCuPt	Pt(acac)₂		Cu(acac)₂, Fe(CO)₅	1	220	59	2014
	Pt₃Co/C	H₂PtCl₆		CoCl₂	2	700	49	2012
	fct-FePtAu	Pt(acac)₂		Fe(CO)₅, HAuCl₄	1	600	58	2012
	FePt/MgO	Pt(acac)₂		Fe(CO)₅	6	750	46	2010
CVD	Pt₃Co	H₂PtCl₆		Co(acac)₂	6	550	70	2015
	PtGe	Pt(NH₃)₄Cl₂		Ge(acac)₂Cl₂	1	550	69	2000

[1]	赵亚楠, 何敏, 刘晓芳, 刘斌, 杨建辉. 金二元纳米晶超晶格的自组装和结构表征[J]. 物理化学学报, 2020, 36(9): 1908041 - .
[2]	刘志明, 刘国亮, 洪昕林. 表面缺陷与钯的沉积对硫化镉纳米晶粒的光催化制氢性能的影响[J]. 物理化学学报, 2019, 35(2): 215 -222 .
[3]	卢秀利,韩莹莹,鲁统部. 石墨炔结构表征及在光电催化反应中的应用[J]. 物理化学学报, 2018, 34(9): 1014 -1028 .
[4]	骆明川, 孙英俊, 秦英楠, 杨勇, 吴冬, 郭少军. 维度调控策略提升铂基纳米晶氧还原催化研究进展[J]. 物理化学学报, 2018, 34(4): 361 -376 .
[5]	阮毛毛,宋乐新,王青山,夏娟,杨尊,滕越,许哲远. 纳米片自组装的(BiO)₂CO₃单分散微米绒球的绿色可控合成及其光催化性能[J]. 物理化学学报, 2017, 33(5): 1033 -1042 .
[6]	周晓琴,张辉,张泽,陈新,金传洪. 用原位液体池透射电镜技术表征金属钯在球形金纳米颗粒表面的异质沉积[J]. 物理化学学报, 2017, 33(3): 458 -463 .
[7]	王亚楠,马品,彭路梅,张迪,方艳艳,周晓文,林原. 醋酸铅作为铅源合成CH₃NH₃PbBr₃_-_xCl_x纳米晶体颗粒[J]. 物理化学学报, 2017, 33(10): 2099 -2105 .
[8]	刘为燕,李亚东,刘甜,干林. 单分散铁氧体纳米颗粒的生长机制与成分偏聚的透射电子显微研究[J]. 物理化学学报, 2017, 33(10): 2106 -2112 .
[9]	许瀚,童叶翔,李高仁. Pd纳米晶的调控合成及其在燃料电池中的应用[J]. 物理化学学报, 2016, 32(9): 2171 -2184 .
[10]	徐正侠,杨继涛,刘康,郭小强. 溶剂热法合成锐钛矿型二氧化钛纳米晶的形状演化规律[J]. 物理化学学报, 2016, 32(2): 581 -588 .
[11]	寇艳蕾, 曲胜春, 刘孔, 池丹, 卢树弟, 李彦沛, 岳世忠. Cd基化合物纳米晶-有机聚合物杂化太阳能电池研究进展[J]. 物理化学学报, 2015, 31(5): 807 -816 .
[12]	钱阳, 徐江. 钛合金双极板表面纳米晶Zr涂层在质子交换膜燃料电池环境中的性能[J]. 物理化学学报, 2015, 31(2): 291 -301 .
[13]	热依莎·多里坤, 阳耀月, 蔡文斌. Pt纳米晶上CO电吸附及电氧化的表面增强红外吸收光谱研究[J]. 物理化学学报, 2015, 31(2): 199 -203 .
[14]	林雪, 于丽丽, 闫丽娜, 关庆丰, 闫永胜, 赵晗. 球形、花形和线状钒酸铋的可控合成及光催化性能[J]. 物理化学学报, 2013, 29(08): 1771 -1777 .
[15]	朱艳艳, 刘艳芳, 吕艳辉, 王华, 凌强, 朱永法. 回流法可控合成BiPO₄纳米棒及其光催化性能[J]. 物理化学学报, 2013, 29(03): 576 -584 .

铂基金属间化合物纳米晶的最新进展：可控合成与电催化应用

Recent Advances in Platinum-based Intermetallic Nanocrystals: Controlled Synthesis and Electrocatalytic Applications

RichHTML

PDF

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 13

参考文献 121

相关文章 15

Metrics

推荐阅读 0