MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075505870 · doi:10.1515/pac-2014-5025

Definition of the transfer coefficient in electrochemistry (IUPAC Recommendations 2014)

2014· article· en· W2075505870 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePure and Applied Chemistry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicElectrochemical Analysis and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryChemical nomenclatureCharge transfer coefficientElectrochemistryKinetic energyTransfer (computing)Current densityElectrodeSign (mathematics)Current (fluid)Cathodic protectionAnodeAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ThermodynamicsPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistryCyclic voltammetryMathematical analysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The transfer coefficient α is a quantity that is commonly employed in the kinetic investigation of electrode processes. An unambiguous definition of the transfer coefficient, independent of any mechanistic consideration and exclusively based on experimental data, is proposed. The cathodic transfer coefficient α c is defined as –( RT / F )(dln| j c |/d E ), where j c is the cathodic current density corrected for any changes in the reactant concentration on the electrode surface with respect to its bulk value, E is the applied electric potential, and R, T , and F have their usual significance. The anodic transfer coefficient α a is defined similarly, by simply replacing j c with the anodic current density and the minus sign with the plus sign. This recommendation aims at clarifying and improving the definition of the transfer coefficient reported in the 3 rd edition of the IUPAC Green Book.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.506

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it