{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04256803907885555, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01256106071179344, 'mean_word_length': 5.025210084033613, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Lead Oxide Nanodots Synthesized by Solvothermal and Microwave
Assisted Method and its Comparative Characterization

This study is focused on synthesis of lead oxide (PbO) nanodots (quantum dots) via two methods viz.
microwave-assisted (B) and solvothermal method (A). The results of microwave-assisted method are
slightly different in comparison to the solvothermal method. Several techniques, such as Fourier
transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), ultraviolet-visible spectroscopy (UV-Vis), powder X-ray
diffraction (XRD), transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and selective area electron diffraction
(SAED) were used for characterizing PbO nanodots synthesized by both methods. The FTIR peak at
687 cm-1 indicated the formation of the Pb-O-Pb bond. The band gap, calculated with the help of UV
data, was ~5.5 eV. The obtained PXRD pattern and miller indices suggested the formation of β-PbO
and α-PbO nanoparticles with orthorhombic and tetragonal geometries. The crystallinity of PbO
nanodots methods by A and B methods was 96% and 99%, respectively. The average crystallite size
(for both samples synthesized by methods A and B) calculated by Debye-Scherrer’s equation was 42
and 38 nm, respectively. Sample A mostly contains α-type lead oxide nanodots, while sample B
mainly contains mostly β-type lead oxide nanodots. The average size of nanodots observed from
TEM images for samples A and B was 3.7 and 2.7 nm, respectively.