Synthesis, Structure and Electrical Properties of Mo‐doped CeO<sub>2</sub>–Materials for SOFCs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, we report the synthesis, structure and electrical conductivity of Mo‐doped compounds with a nominal chemical formula of Ce1–xMoxO2+δ (x = 0.05, 0.07, 0.1) (CMO). The formation of fluorite‐like structure with a small amount of Ce8Mo12O49 impurity (JCPDS Card No. 31‐0330) was confirmed using a powder X‐ray diffraction (PXRD). The fluoride‐type structure was retained under wet H2 and CH4 atmospheres at 700 and 800 °C, while diffraction peaks due to metal Mo were observed in dry H2 under the same condition. AC impedance measurements showed that the total conductivity increases with increasing Mo content in CMO, and among the investigated samples, Ce0.9Mo0.1O2+δ exhibited the highest electrical conductivity with a value of 2.8 × 10–4 and 5.08 × 10–2 S cm–1 at 550 °C in air and wet H2, respectively. The electrical conductivity was found to be nearly the same, especially at high temperatures, in air, O2 and N2. Chemical compatibility of Ce0.9Mo0.1O2+δ with 10 mol‐% Y2O3 stabilised ZrO2 (YSZ) and Ce0.9Gd0.1O1.95 (CGO) oxide ion electrolytes in wet H2 was evaluated at 800–1,000 °C, using PXRD and EDX analyses. PXRD showed that CMO was found to react with YSZ electrolyte at 1,000 °C. The area specific polarisation resistance (ASPR) of Ce0.9Mo0.1O2+δ on YSZ was found to be 8.58 ohm cm2 at 800 °C in wet H2.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".