MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2516362301 · doi:10.1149/ma2016-02/38/2593

Towards Understanding of the Anode Catalyst Layer Structure for Extended Reversal Tolerance: An Advanced Characterization Approach

2016· article· en· W2516362301 on OpenAlexaff
Darija Susac, Jasna Janković, Arash Ash, Andreas Pütz, Chao Lei, Hao Zhang, Wendy Lee, Jürgen Stumper

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsAutomotive Fuel Cell Cooperation (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnodeProton exchange membrane fuel cellMaterials scienceCatalysisOxygen evolutionCharacterization (materials science)Layer (electronics)Chemical engineeringDurabilityNanotechnologyComposite materialElectrodeElectrochemistryChemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proton exchange membrane fuel cells for automotive applications (PEMFC) frequently experience transient conditions such as start-up/shut-down, freeze start-up and local fuel starvation at the anode catalyst layer (ACL) that are responsible for the loss of performance and durability as a result of irreversible carbon corrosion [1]. To mitigate such degradation, oxygen evolution catalysts have been incorporated into ACL and studied for effects on membrane electrode assembly (MEA) performance and reversal tolerance. Ru and Ir oxides are among the most studied catalysts for oxygen evolution reaction (OER) in both PEMFCs and water electrolyzers [2-5]. Although comparative measurements have been performed to investigate the OER activity trends, systematic studies focusing on effects of particle/agglomerate size and distribution within ACL on PEMFC MEA reversal tolerance have not yet been reported. In order to be able to design anode catalyst layer structures that meet the performance and reversal tolerance requirements, it is necessary to obtain a better understanding of structure versus performance relationships. This requires the capability to fabricate different anode catalyst layer structures, as well as efforts in development of methodologies to characterize the spatial distribution of all components within the catalyst layers. The ultimate goal is to use the experimentally measured structural parameters as inputs for the development of models for understanding of the relationship between anode structures and reversal tolerance. The objective of this work is to present the methodology for structural characterization of anode catalyst layers containing OER materials. Structural parameters correlating with the extended reversal tolerance will be discussed. References S. Enz, T.A. Dao, M. Messerschmidt and J. Scholta, Investigation of degradation effects in polymer electrolyte fuel cells under automotive-related operating conditions, J. Power Sources, 274 (2015) 521-535 E. Antolini, Ir as catalyst and cocatalyst for oxygen evolution/reduction in acidic polymer electrolyte membrane electrolyzers and fuel cells, ACS Catal. 4 (2014) 1426-1440 T. Reier, M. Oezaslan and P. Strasser, Electrocatalytic oxygen evolution reaction (OER) on Ru, Ir and Pt catalysts: a comparative study of nanoparticles and bulk materials, ACS Catal. 2 (2012) 1765-1772 S. Cherevko, T. Reier, A.R. Zeradjanin, Z. Pavolek, P. Strasser and K.J.J. Mayrhofer, Stability of nanostructure iridium oxide electrocatalysts during oxygen evolution reaction in acidic environment, Electrochem. Commun. 48 (2014) 81-85 M. Bernicke, E. Ortel, T. Reier, A. Bergmann, J.F. de Araujo, P. Strasser and R. Kraerhnet, Iridium oxide coatings with template porosity as highly active oxygen evolution catalysts: structure-activity relationship, ChemSusChem, 8 (2015) 1908-1915

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.222
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

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting Abstracts→Same topicFuel Cells and Related Materials→French-language works237,207→