Molecular Oxygen Reduction in PEM Fuel Cell Conditions: ToF-SIMS Analysis of Co-Based Electrocatalysts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A series of Co-based electrocatalysts for oxygen reduction in acid media has been prepared using two different Co precursors: cobalt acetate (CoAc) and a cobalt porphyrin (CoTMPP). These catalysts have been analyzed by ToF-SIMS to obtain information on the number and the structure of catalytic active sites in these materials. The results are compared with the results of a similar analysis already performed on a series of Fe-based electrocatalysts (J. Phys. Chem. B 2002, 106, 8705) also prepared with two different Fe precursors: iron acetate (FeAc) and an iron porphyrin (ClFeTMPP). The interpretation of ToF-SIMS data for Fe-based catalysts allowed us to conclude that whatever the Fe precursor was, the same catalytic sites (FeN2/C and FeN4/C, with their respective dominant ToF-SIMS signatures: FeN2C4+ and FeN4C8+ ions) were found. The comparison of the ToF-SIMS data with the activity of those catalysts led to the conclusion that the FeN2C catalytic site was more active than FeN4/C. When the same procedure is applied to ToF-SIMS data measured for Co-based catalysts, the following conclusions are drawn: (i) as for Fe precursors, both Co precursors also give similar results; (ii) as for Fe-based catalysts, the same four families of MetalNxCy+ ions, with 1, 2, 3, and 4 nitrogen atoms, are also found in the spectra of Co-based catalysts, but there is no dominant CoNxCy+ ion signature; (iii) only CoN4/C can be ascertained on the basis of ToF-SIMS measurements. There is no strong support from ToF-SIMS measurements for (or against) the existence of CoN2/C in Co-based catalysts as there is for FeN2/C in Fe-based catalysts; (iv) contrary to Fe-based catalysts, all catalytic sites (if there are any besides CoN4/C) are about equally active in Co-based electrocatalysts.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".