MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2803537584 · doi:10.1149/ma2018-01/27/1590

Water Balance in Polymer Electrolyte Fuel Cells with Ultra-Low Pt Loading: From Modeling to Design

2018· article· en· W2803537584 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Eikerling, Tasleem Ahmad Muzaffar

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrolyteContext (archaeology)PlatinumMaterials scienceProton exchange membrane fuel cellDiffusionCatalysisChemical engineeringFabricationPolymerElectrodeFuel cellsComposite materialChemistryEngineeringThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The commercial deployment of polymer electrolyte fuel cells (PEFCs) hinges on breakthroughs in design and integration of highly performing and durable catalyst layers with drastically reduced platinum loading. In this context, experimental studies have shown an unexpectedly large increase of voltage losses upon a marked reduction of the Pt content. In an effort to unravel this behavior, physical modeling of porous electrodes is employed to analyze a wide range of experimental literature data. Detailed evaluation of the data reveals correlated trends in essential fuel cell parameters. These findings are interpreted in view of the tipping water balance that affects the interplay of transport and reaction in catalyst layer and gas diffusion media. As will be demonstrated, the performed model-based analysis warrants the definition of a correlation exponent that should be used to assess the merit of different approaches to catalyst layer fabrication.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.189
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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