Electrochemical Promotion of Oxidative Coupling of Methane on Platinum/Polybenzimidazole Catalyst
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The electrochemical promotion of catalytic methane oxidation was studied using a ( CH 4 , O 2 , Ar ) , Pt | polybenzimidazole ( PBI ) H 3 PO 4 | Pt , ( H 2 , Ar ) fuel cell at 135°C. It has been found that C 2 H 2 , CO 2 , and water are the main oxidation products. Without polarization the yield of C 2 H 2 was 0.9% and the yield of CO 2 was 7.3%. This means that C 2 open-circuit selectivity was approximately 11%. Open-circuit voltage was around 0.6 V. It has been shown that the CH 4 → C 2 H 2 catalytic reaction can be electrochemically promoted at negative polarization and exhibits a clear “volcano-type” promotion behavior, meaning that there was a maximum promotion effect at a polarization of −0.15 V, or 0.45 V catalyst potential vs. a hydrogen electrode (3.8% C 2 H 2 yield). The catalytic rate enhancement ratio, r ( C 2 ) / r o ( C 2 ) , at this maximum was 4.2. There was no C 2 H 2 production at polarization ⩾0.1 and ⩽−0.3 V. The yield of C 2 H 2 decreased with decreasing temperature. Dependence of CO 2 yield on polarization also showed a “volcano-type” behavior with maximum yield of 8.3% at −0.15 V polarization. The catalytic rate enhancement ratio for CO 2 production, r ( CO 2 ) / r o ( CO 2 ) , at this maximum was 1.1, which means that this catalytic reaction is only slightly affected by the electrochemical polarization. This indicates that polarization especially affects the C 2 selectivity of the catalyst. The obtained data was explained by the electrochemical production of Pt-H active centers at the electrolyte-catalyst-gaseous reactant interface ( λ ≫ 1 ) . © 2002 The Electrochemical Society. All rights reserved.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".