Comparison of ethanol and methanol crossover through different MEA components and structures by cyclic voltammetry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The crossover rate of ethanol or methanol through membrane electrode assembly (MEA) and MEA components was studied quantitatively at 25 and 60 °C by cyclic voltammetry method. The results obtained in this work show that cyclic voltammetry is a powerful technique to assess the crossover phenomenon through MEA components and structures. In all cases, the ethanol crossover rates are lower than those of methanol. The ethanol and methanol crossover rates depend upon time and temperature. For an initial concentration of 1 M of ethanol or methanol, the crossover rate increases to a maximum after the first hour of the cell operation and then decreases gradually to a certain concentration after the third hour. At 60 °C, the maximum concentration of ethanol crossover rate is lower than that obtained at 25 °C. The crossover rate of ethanol or methanol through MEA is lower than through the components alone (pressed or nonpressed membranes or gas diffusion electrode). Copyright © 2008 Curtin University of Technology and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".