MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999990712 · doi:10.2478/s13531-011-0012-y

Microfluidic fuel cell systems

2011· article· en· W1999990712 on OpenAlexafffund
Bernard Chi Shern Ho, Erik Kjeang

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundSimon Fraser University
KeywordsMicrofluidicsMicroscale chemistryLiquid fuelUnitized regenerative fuel cellFuel cellsFluidicsProton exchange membrane fuel cellNanotechnologyMaterials scienceProcess engineeringChemistryEngineeringChemical engineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A microfluidic fuel cell is a microfabricated device that produces electrical power through electrochemical reactions involving a fuel and an oxidant. Microfluidic fuel cell systems exploit co-laminar flow on the microscale to separate the fuel and oxidant species, in contrast to conventional fuel cells employing an ion exchange membrane for this function. Since 2002 when the first microfluidic fuel cell was invented, many different fuels, oxidants, and architectures have been investigated conceptually and experimentally. In this mini-review article, recent advancements in the field of microfluidic fuel cell systems are documented, with particular emphasis on design, operation, and performance. The present microfluidic fuel cell systems are categorized by the fluidic phases of the fuel and oxidant streams, featuring gaseous/gaseous, liquid/gaseous, and liquid/liquid systems. The typical cell configurations and recent contributions in each category are analyzed. Key research challenges and opportunities are highlighted and recommendations for further work are provided.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.005

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.155 · 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

Citations34
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen EngineeringSame topicFuel Cells and Related MaterialsFrench-language works237,207