MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Paper-based water management system for microfabricated packageless fuel cell

2018· article· en· W2884814066 on OpenAlexaff
S Hamel, Luc G. Fréchette

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsInstitut interdisciplinaire d'innovation technologiqueUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnodeCathodeGenerator (circuit theory)HumidityMaterials scienceEvaporationNuclear engineeringFuel cellsAirflowEnvironmental scienceFlooding (psychology)Process engineeringPower (physics)Automotive engineeringElectrical engineeringMechanical engineeringChemical engineeringEngineeringMeteorologyChemistryThermodynamicsPhysicsElectrode

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we report the first successful implementation of a complete paper-based water management system (WMS) that collects the excess water at the cathode of a microfabricated packageless fuel cell (PLFC) and redistribute it to its anode and to an evaporation surface that simulate a hydride-based hydrogen generator. Five configurations of WMS were tested on a 1 cm 2 air-breathing PLFC and show that with the best configuration, the power output of the cell can be improved by 90% for at least 24h. We experimentally demonstrate that not only cathode flooding issues must be address to obtain an efficient WMS but also that anode drying plays a major role in poor performance of small air-breathing fuel cells. Finally, with the optimal configuration of WMS, the PLFC in air-breathing mode shows similar performances as with humidity controlled air forced-flow.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicFuel Cells and Related MaterialsFrench-language works237,207