Flexible Multiwall Carbon Nano-Tubes/Conductive Polymer Composite Electrode for Supercapacitor Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present paper investigates three types of electrically conductive polymers (ECPs), namely polyaniline, polypyrrole and poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) PEDOT composite with multi-walled carbon nanotubes (CNTs) for supercapacitor applications. Their capacitive performance has been evaluated in both three electrodes half-cell and two electrodes cell setup. The nanocomposite were fabricated by polymerizing pseudocapacitive conductive polymer onto the MWCNT surface through the in-situ chemical polymerization approach. The composites were aimed to be optimized through varying the ECPs to MWCNT ratios. Half-cell electrochemical study was conducted to determine the optimal proportion of MWCNT and ECP in this parametric study. Two electrodes cell electrochemical study unveiled the potential device’s energy storage performance. MWCNT was found to act as the framework for the polymerization of the ECP into a tubular structure. Among the three composites, Ppy/MWCNT composite showed superior supercapacitor characteristics at scan rates of up to 500mV/s.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".