Improved Catalytic Reactor for the Electrochemical Promotion of Highly Dispersed Ru Nanoparticles with CeO<sub>2</sub> Support
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An improved design for a catalytic reactor for electrochemical promotion of highly dispersed catalysts was presented and compared to that of a plug flow-type reactor for the model reaction of ethylene oxidation. Electrochemical cells were prepared with low particle size (1.1 nm) Ru nanoparticles (RuNPs) which were supported on a mixed ionic-electronic conductor, CeO2, with a low metal loading (1 wt%), interfaced with a YSZ electrolyte. Comparable catalytic performance between the two reactors was observed for both open-circuits measurements. However, the rate enhancement ratio in the single-chamber capsule (SCC) reactor was found to be 1.6 compared to 1.4 for the plug flow-type reactor for an applied current of -5μA. These results were attributed to better electrical contact to the isolated RuNPs. Furthermore, the SCC reactor is simple to assemble and provides an intimate contact between the RuNPs/CeO2 catalyst and the current collector (i.e., gold mesh).
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".