MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794692728 · doi:10.1149/2.0261806jes

Understanding the Corrosion Resistance of Meso- and Micro-Porous Carbons for Application in PEM Fuel Cells

2018· article· en· W2794692728 on OpenAlexafffund
Farisa Forouzandeh, Xiaoan Li, Dustin Banham, Fangxia Feng, Siyu Ye, Viola Birss

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicElectrocatalysts for Energy Conversion
Canadian institutionsBallard Power Systems (Canada)University of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Innovates - Technology FuturesBallard Power Systems
KeywordsCorrosionMicroporous materialMaterials scienceCrystallinityProton exchange membrane fuel cellChemical engineeringCarbon fibersPorosityDispersityCarbon blackComposite materialFuel cellsPolymer chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The stability of carbon support materials is critical to the lifetime of proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cells. Here, we have used a rigorous potential stepping and i/t analysis regime to compare the corrosion resistance of the commonly used microporous carbon black powder, Vulcan carbon (VC), with that of a family of hard-templated mesoporous colloid-imprinted carbon (CICs, with monodisperse pore sizes ranging from 10–50 nm), also using heat-treatment (at 1500°C under N2 for 2 h) to help understand and differentiate their stability. It was found that VC is more corrosion-resistant than the CICs, as VC was already heat-treated at > 1400°C during its preparation, while the CICs experienced a maximum of 900°C during their in-house synthesis. Consistent with this, the CICs have a higher surface density of graphene sheet edges, which are prone to oxidation, and yet these sites are also better at nucleating and stabilizing Pt nanoparticles. Importantly, the smaller the CIC pore size, the better its corrosion resistance, while heat-treatment makes both VC and the CICs more corrosion resistant, giving a 40–60% increase in durability. This is attributed to enhanced hydrophobicity and crystallinity of the carbons and a decrease in the density of defects.

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)0.001
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 score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations47
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Electrochemical SocietySame topicElectrocatalysts for Energy ConversionFrench-language works237,207