Abstract
AbstractIn the “Comment on article by Gonzaga et al. J Am Ceram Soc. 2020;103:6280‐6288”, Paparazzo argues that the estimated value of Ce3+ amount in our CeO2 samples through X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) analysis is ~10% and there is no dependence on the annealing temperature or Pr‐doping. However, a comparison of our XPS Ce 3d spectra with the reference presented by that author reveals characteristics in these spectra of higher at.%Ce3+ being consistent with values of around 24%. Furthermore, the intensity of the absorption in the region around the feature assigned as v′ in XPS Ce 3d spectra decreases as a function of Pr‐doping and annealing temperature, confirming different at.%Ce3+ for the samples due to these aspects.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
