MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974111743 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20586

Material advancements in supercapacitors: From activated carbon to carbon nanotube and graphene

2011· article· en· W1974111743 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Aaron Davies, Aiping Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSupercapacitor Materials and Fabrication
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupercapacitorPseudocapacitanceGrapheneMaterials scienceCarbon nanotubeNanotechnologyEnergy storageCarbon fibersElectrolyteCapacitorElectrochemistryElectrodePower (physics)Composite materialChemistryVoltageElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The electrochemical capacitor (EC), also known as supercapacitor, is an energy storage device possessing a near infinite life‐cycle and high power density recognised to store energy in the double‐layer or through pseudocapacitance as a result of an applied potential. Fundamental principles of charge storage in relation to the important physical and chemical characteristics of electrode materials are addressed in the following review, with carbon‐made electrodes, specifically activated carbon, carbon fibres and aerogels, carbon nanotubes and graphene emphasised in regards to their enhancement of the characteristic energy and power densities of ECs. Pseudocapacitive materials, notably transition metal oxides and nitrides, and conducting polymers are remarked by the potential to further improve EC performance through synergistic effects and asymmetric design. Research towards gaining a better understanding of charge storage in sub‐micropores, material design and improving the performance of alternative electrolytes are expected to greatly enhance the capabilities of these devices in the near future.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.173 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations214
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicSupercapacitor Materials and FabricationFrench-language works237,207