MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990378648 · doi:10.1063/1.2202919

High throughput screening of electrocatalysts for fuel cell applications

2006· article· en· W1990378648 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mark Prochaska, Jing Jin, Dominic Rochefort, Lin Zhuang, Francis J. DiSalvo, Héctor D. Abruña, R. B. van Dover

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicElectrocatalysts for Energy Conversion
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCornell Center for Materials Research
KeywordsElectrocatalystMaterials scienceSubstrate (aquarium)NanotechnologyTernary operationElectrochemistryNanoparticleResolution (logic)Fuel cellsFluorescenceFluorescence microscopeMicroscopyChemical engineeringHigh-throughput screeningElectrodeComputer scienceOpticsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe methodologies for the generation and screening of combinatorial libraries of electrocatalyst materials for fuel cell applications, generated by cosputtering of three elements onto a Si substrate coated with a Ta adhesion underlayer. Screening was carried out via a fluorescence assay as well as by scanning electrochemical microscopy. Whereas the former provided rapid qualitative screening with limited spatial resolution, the latter provided high spatial resolution. The fluorescence screening method was tested on Pt, PtBi, PtPb, and PtRu nanoparticles, while both methods were tested on a film containing a Pt–Bi–Pb ternary composition spread.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations62
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicElectrocatalysts for Energy ConversionFrench-language works237,207