MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978242166 · doi:10.1038/srep01226

High volumetric power density, non-enzymatic, glucose fuel cells

2013· article· en· W1978242166 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Vlad Oncescu, David Erickson

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrochemical sensors and biosensors
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice of Naval ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCornell Center for Materials Research
KeywordsPower densityStack (abstract data type)Materials scienceFabricationLithium (medication)Battery (electricity)ElectrodeFuel cellsPower (physics)NanotechnologyComputer scienceChemistryChemical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of new implantable medical devices has been limited in the past by slow advances in lithium battery technology. Non-enzymatic glucose fuel cells are promising replacement candidates for lithium batteries because of good long-term stability and adequate power density. The devices developed to date however use an "oxygen depletion design" whereby the electrodes are stacked on top of each other leading to low volumetric power density and complicated fabrication protocols. Here we have developed a novel single-layer fuel cell with good performance (2 μW cm⁻²) and stability that can be integrated directly as a coating layer on large implantable devices, or stacked to obtain a high volumetric power density (over 16 μW cm⁻³). This represents the first demonstration of a low volume non-enzymatic fuel cell stack with high power density, greatly increasing the range of applications for non-enzymatic glucose fuel cells.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.169
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Citations80
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicElectrochemical sensors and biosensorsFrench-language works237,207