Physical Chemistry Literature Review Support
Budget: $30 – $250 AUD
I need a concise, up-to-date literature review that maps the state of photocatalytic water splitting for H2 production
Physics and chemistry research relevant to my current project. A solid grounding in both physics and chemistry will help you recognize mechanistic subtleties and energetic considerations that many purely synthetic overviews miss.
Scope
The work centres on locating, reading, and synthesising peer-reviewed papers published in the last ten years. Please lean on databases such as SciFinder, Reaxys, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, then distil the findings into a clear narrative that highlights reaction trends, mechanistic insights, and remaining knowledge gaps.
Deliverables (all in editable Word format)
• An annotated bibliography with full citations (ACS style)
• A 3,000-word critical review that organises the literature thematically and compares methodologies, yields, and mechanistic rationales
• A brief section identifying unanswered questions or promising directions for future study
Acceptance criteria
The review must reference at least 40 primary articles, include DOI links, and present figures or schemes where they genuinely aid comprehension. Writing should be original, properly cited, and ready for journal submission or grant backing.
Clear, analytically driven commentary is more important to me than sheer length, so focus on depth and coherence over volume.
Physics and chemistry research relevant to my current project. A solid grounding in both physics and chemistry will help you recognize mechanistic subtleties and energetic considerations that many purely synthetic overviews miss.
Scope
The work centres on locating, reading, and synthesising peer-reviewed papers published in the last ten years. Please lean on databases such as SciFinder, Reaxys, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, then distil the findings into a clear narrative that highlights reaction trends, mechanistic insights, and remaining knowledge gaps.
Deliverables (all in editable Word format)
• An annotated bibliography with full citations (ACS style)
• A 3,000-word critical review that organises the literature thematically and compares methodologies, yields, and mechanistic rationales
• A brief section identifying unanswered questions or promising directions for future study
Acceptance criteria
The review must reference at least 40 primary articles, include DOI links, and present figures or schemes where they genuinely aid comprehension. Writing should be original, properly cited, and ready for journal submission or grant backing.
Clear, analytically driven commentary is more important to me than sheer length, so focus on depth and coherence over volume.