Investigation of Activity of Sputtered Transition-Metal (TM)–C–N (TM = V, Cr, Mn, Co, Ni) Catalysts for Oxygen Reduction Reaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Variations with heat-treatment temperature of the structure and the electrocatalytic activity of sputtered transition-metal (TM)–C–N ( , Cr, Mn, Co, and Ni) films for the oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) in acid and alkaline electrolytes were studied. The films prepared were all originally amorphous. At a critical heat-treatment temperature ( , different for each composition) substantial nitrogen release occurred and the films transformed to a heterogeneous N-containing carbon structure with either , Co, Ni, , or , depending on the TM used. In acid electrolyte, heat-treated , , and films began to show oxygen reduction activity at , while and films showed little or no activity for ORR in acid electrolyte for all temperatures studied. However, all of the heat-treated ( , Cr, Mn, Co, and Ni) films showed oxygen reduction activity in alkaline electrolyte even when heated to temperatures below . Because all the films heated above contained N-containing carbon, the activity of heat-treated sputtered and C films, as well as graphite powder, were studied for comparison. Their activities were much lower in acid electrolyte than those of the , , and films heat-treated at the same temperatures. films, C films, and graphite powder all showed activity in alkaline electrolyte but were less active than some heated and films. The choice of TM and the heat-treatment temperature played important roles in determining the activity of the sputtered films for ORR in acid and alkaline electrolytes. The corrosion stability of the heat-treated libraries was studied as well. Heat-treated libraries showed good passivation against corrosion.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".