MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036142233 · doi:10.1002/fuce.200300004

A Review of Mathematical Models for Hydrogen and Direct Methanol Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Cells

2004· review· en· W2036142233 on OpenAlexaff
K. Zhen Yao, Kunal Karan, Kimberley B. McAuley, Patrick H. Oosthuizen, Brant A. Peppley, Tao Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueFuel Cells · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsDuPont (Canada)Royal Military College of CanadaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrolyteFuel cellsMembraneMethanol fuelHydrogenProton exchange membrane fuel cellElectrochemistryPolymerMaterials scienceDiffusionTransport phenomenaMathematical modelMethanolChemical engineeringChemistryComputer scienceMechanicsThermodynamicsElectrodeEngineeringPhysicsOrganic chemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents a review of the mathematical modeling of two types of polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells: hydrogen fuel cells and direct methanol fuel cells. Models of single cells are described as well as models of entire fuel cell stacks. Methods for obtaining model parameters are briefly summarized, as well as the numerical techniques used to solve the model equations. Effective models have been developed to describe the fundamental electrochemical and transport phenomena occurring in the diffusion layers, catalyst layers, and membrane. More research is required to develop models that are validated using experimental data, and models that can account for complex two‐phase flows of liquids and gases.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.005

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations115
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFuel CellsSame topicFuel Cells and Related MaterialsFrench-language works237,207