MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1481468349 · doi:10.1002/jctb.4325

Passive air breathing flat‐plate microbial fuel cell operation

2014· article· en· W1481468349 on OpenAlexafffund
Sona Kazemi, Madjid Mohseni, Khalid Fatih

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicrobial Fuel Cells and Bioremediation
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Research Council CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMicrobial fuel cellAnodeCathodePower densityOhmic contactElectricity generationMaterials scienceProton exchange membrane fuel cellChemical engineeringChemistryPulp and paper industryElectrical engineeringElectrodeComposite materialPower (physics)Fuel cellsEngineeringThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND High cost and ohmic loss are two issues that microbial fuel cells (MFC) face before becoming economically viable. To address the high cost and ohmic loss issues, a flat‐plate MFC (FPMFC) configuration applying a passive air‐breathing cathode and a three‐dimensional anode was introduced. Electricity generation was examined in the FPMFC through operation in the presence and absence of a proton exchange membrane (PEM), and in batch and continuous modes. RESULTS Continuous operation of the FPMFC in the presence of a PEM favored power generation, mainly due to elimination of oxygen and biomass in the anode. Peak power density of 18 Wm‐3 was produced in the presence of a PEM (ohmic resistance 40 Ω cm2), which was more than 5‐fold higher than that with J‐cloth. During batch operation, the power density increased and reached maximum in the third batch (18 W m‐3 at 60 A m‐3). Greater stability was observed during continuous operation resulting in a 2.5‐fold increase in peak power density (44 W m‐3 at 146 A m‐3). CONCLUSION The passive air‐breathing FPMFC showed promising performance, offering a more economically viable configuration than the conventional FPMFCs using active (air, ferricyanide, and ferric iron) cathodes. © 2014 Crown copyright. Journal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology © 2014 Society of Chemical Industry

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chemical Technology & BiotechnologySame topicMicrobial Fuel Cells and BioremediationFrench-language works237,207