Electrophoretic Deposition of Manganese Dioxide−Multiwalled Carbon Nanotube Composites for Electrochemical Supercapacitors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cathodic electrophoretic deposition (EPD) method has been developed for the deposition of composite manganese dioxide-multiwalled carbon nanotube (MWCNT) films. Dopamine (DA) was shown to be an effective charging additive, which provides stabilization of manganese dioxide nanoparticles and MWCNTs in the suspensions. The influence of DA concentration on the deposition efficiency has been studied. EPD has been utilized for the fabrication of porous nanostructured films for application in electrochemical supercapacitors (ES). Obtained films were studied using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), differential thermal analysis (DTA), cyclic voltammetry (CV), and impedance spectroscopy. CV data for the films tested in the 0.5 M Na(2)SO(4) solutions showed capacitive behavior in the voltage window of 0-0.9 V. The highest specific capacitance (SC) of approximately 650 F g(-1) was obtained at a scan rate of 2 mV s(-1). The SC decreased with an increasing scan rate in the range of 2-100 mV s(-1). The deposition mechanism, kinetics of deposition, and charge storage properties of the films are discussed.
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) | 0.001 | 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".