MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313131208 · doi:10.1021/jz3019012

Physical Chemistry Research Toward Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Advancement

2013· article· en· W2313131208 on OpenAlexaff
Karen Swider‐Lyons, Stephen Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicElectrocatalysts for Energy Conversion
Canadian institutionsAutomotive Fuel Cell Cooperation (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProton exchange membrane fuel cellElectrocatalystFuel cellsUnitized regenerative fuel cellCommercializationNanotechnologyChemistryElectrochemistryMaterials scienceProcess engineeringChemical engineeringEngineeringElectrodePhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrogen fuel cells, the most common type of which are proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs), are on a rapid path to commercialization. We credit physical chemistry research in oxygen reduction electrocatalysis and theory with significant breakthroughs, enabling more cost-effective fuel cells. However, most of the physical chemistry has been restricted to studies of platinum and related alloys. More work is needed to better understand electrocatalysts generally in terms of properties and characterization. While the advent of such highly active catalysts will enable smaller, less expensive, and more powerful stacks, they will require better understanding and a complete restructuring of the diffusion media in PEMFCs to facilitate faster transport of the reactants (O2) and products (H2O). Even Ohmic losses between materials become more important at high power. Such lessons from PEMFC research are relevant to other electrochemical conversion systems, including Li-air batteries and flow batteries.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.005

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations44
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry LettersSame topicElectrocatalysts for Energy ConversionFrench-language works237,207