A Comparison of Air and Hydrogen Peroxide Oxygenated Microbial Fuel Cell Reactors
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, a two-compartment continuous flow microbial fuel cell (MFC) reactor was used to compare the efficiencies of cathode oxygenation by air and by hydrogen peroxide. The MFC reactor had neither a proton-selective membrane nor an electron transfer mediator. At startup, the cathodic compartment was continuously aerated and the anodic compartment was fed with a glucose solution. An increase of electrical power generation from 0.008 to 7.2 mW m(-2) of anode surface with a steady-state potential of 215-225 mV was observed within a period of 12 days. The performance of the air-oxygenated MFC reactor progressively declined over time because of biofilm proliferation in the cathodic compartment. Oxygenation of the cathodic compartment using 300 mL d(-1) of 0.3% hydrogen peroxide solution resulted in a power density of up to 22 mW m(-2) (68.2 mA m(-2)) of anode surface at a potential of 340-350 mV. The use of H2O2 for oxygenation was found to improve the long-term stability of the MFC reactor.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it