Distortions in Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy Measurements Using 3‐Electrode Methods in SOFC. I – Effect of Cell Geometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The use of a reference electrode (RE) is necessary to independently measure the overpotential of each electrode in solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC). This type of set‐up, known as the 3‐electrode (or 3‐terminal) configuration, can give erroneous results if the RE does not effectively separate the potential of the two active electrodes. In this work, calculations and experiments were performed to verify the effectiveness of the 3‐electrode configuration used in electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) measurements for studying the kinetics of anodes and cathodes in SOFC. Initially, a theoretical analysis of the impedance distortions in relation to the electrode geometry and configuration is presented and the main causes of distortions are elucidated. Then, this analysis is corroborated by experimental results obtained using two specially designed cells. Calculations and experiments reconfirm that configurations characterised by electrodes of equal area and symmetrical placement do not produce EIS distortions when the electrodes have similar area‐specific polarisation resistances and time constants. Moreover, distortions can be low even in considerably misaligned configurations when electrodes are small and relatively inactive.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".