MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2297670263 · doi:10.1149/06602.0253ecst

Impedance Spectroscopy Analysis of Ni/YSZ Interfaces Prepared by Liquid Precursor Deposition

2015· article· en· W2297670263 on OpenAlexafffund
Aligül Büyükaksoy, Viola Birss

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Transactions · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicChalcogenide Semiconductor Thin Films
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Innovates - Technology FuturesUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsDielectric spectroscopyMaterials scienceYttria-stabilized zirconiaAnodeThin filmChemical engineeringTriple phase boundaryElectrochemistryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Composite materialCeramicElectrodeNanotechnologyCubic zirconiaChemistryPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present study, thin film Ni anodes, prepared by liquid precursor deposition on dense YSZ substrates, were analyzed by electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) in a humidified H 2 environment at 500 to 700 °C, with the activation energy of 1.30 eV ascribed to the charge transfer reaction at the Ni – YSZ - gas triple phase boundary (tpb). For comparison, the same Ni precursor was infiltrated into a porous YSZ scaffold and was also then characterized by EIS analysis. A transmission line model was used to analyze the EIS data obtained from the infiltrated Ni-YSZ composite anodes, allowing the separation of the effects of ionic transport in the YSZ network and the impedance due to the electrochemical reaction at the tpb. The activation energy for the latter process was determined to be the same as for the model thin film Ni anode, suggesting that Ni/YSZ interfaces prepared in the form of Ni thin films on YSZ substrate and Ni-YSZ composites by the deposition of the same polymeric Ni precursor exhibit comparable impedance behavior.

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 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 score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS TransactionsSame topicChalcogenide Semiconductor Thin FilmsFrench-language works237,207