Comparative Study of Two Types of Iron Doped Carbon Aerogels for Electrochemical Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Iron doped carbon aerogels have been prepared by sol-gel polymerization of potassium salt of 2,4-dihydroxybenzoic acid with formaldehyde followed by an ion-exchange process between K+ doped wet gel and Fe(II) or Fe(III) ion aqueous solutions. The resulted Fe(II) or Fe(III) doped gels have been dried in supercritical conditions with liquid CO2 and then pyrolyzed in high temperature resulting two types of iron doped carbon aerogels. These aerogels were morpho-structural investigated by using BET method, transmission electron microscopy, X-ray diffraction and elemental analysis. Also, these iron doped carbon aerogels (CAD-Fe(2+) and CAD-Fe(3+)) were tested for realization of modified carbon paste electrodes. CAD-Fe(2+) aerogel showed better electrochemical activity than CAD-Fe(3+) and also a good electrocatalytic activity towards H2O2 reduction (expressed by an electrocatalytic efficiency of 404% measured at – 500 mV vs. SCE).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".