Donor–Acceptor Polymers for Electrochemical Supercapacitors: Synthesis, Testing, and Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Donor–acceptor polymers can store both a positive and negative charge allowing them to function as both the positive and negative charge storage material in a supercapacitor device, however few have been explored for this application. Here, we describe the synthesis of several donor–acceptor polymers and their electrodeposited polymer electrodes. We use differing molecular structures to examine the effect of electron acceptor concentration and show that device stability can be improved significantly by increasing the acceptor concentration. Further, we provide computational insight into the important chemical requirements for achieving even higher performance supercapacitors based on donor–acceptor conjugated polymers. Supercapacitor devices with specific energy and specific power as high as 11 Wh kg–1 (at 0.5 A g–1) and 20 kW kg–1 (at 50 A g–1 with an energy of 3.6 Wh kg–1) are reported, which are some of the highest values achieved to date.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".