MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588691096 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b12164

Active, Simple Iridium–Copper Hydrous Oxide Electrocatalysts for Water Oxidation

2017· article· en· W2588691096 on OpenAlexafffund
Chao Wang, Reza B. Moghaddam, Steven H. Bergens

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicElectrocatalysts for Energy Conversion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Innovates - Technology Futures
KeywordsOverpotentialIridiumChemistryAqueous solutionCatalysisHydrateOxideInorganic chemistryCopperX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyElectrochemistryChemical engineeringPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A series of Ir 1– x Cu x ( x = 0–0.5) hydrous oxide nanoparticles (HO-np) were prepared simply by stirring solutions of IrCl 3 hydrate and CuCl 2 hydrate in aqueous KOH under air. Their water oxidation activities were measured in 0.1 M HClO 4 . The Ir 0.89 Cu 0.11 HO-np was the most active catalyst in the series with mass (Ir) – normalized activity = 142 A g Ir –1 and electrochemically accessible Ir sites normalized activity >180 A mmol Ir –1 (both at 250 mV overpotential). The Ir 0.89 Cu 0.11 HO-nps were stable for 24 h galvanostatic oxidations at 1 mA cm –2 geometric, with only 280 mV overpotential. The average diameter of the Ir 0.89 Cu 0.11 HO-nps was ∼1.30 nm. XPS results suggested that doping with Cu 2+ reduces the overall charge in the lattice, resulting in higher electron density at Ir than in pure Ir HO-np. Preliminary mechanistic investigations showed that the activity enhancement by Cu is not only a surface area effect, and the presence of Cu does not appear to significantly alter the mechanism of the water oxidation reaction.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations34
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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