MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888033463 · doi:10.1002/batt.201800069

Synthesis of Bifunctional Catalysts for Metal‐Air Batteries Through Direct Deposition Methods

2018· article· en· W2888033463 on OpenAlexafffund
Ming Xiong, Douglas G. Ivey

Bibliographic record

VenueBatteries & Supercaps · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicElectrocatalysts for Energy Conversion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBifunctionalCatalysisBattery (electricity)Deposition (geology)Chemical vapor depositionMaterials scienceElectrodeOxygen reduction reactionNanotechnologyOxygen evolutionChemical engineeringChemistryElectrochemistryEngineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rechargeable metal‐air batteries, such as Li‐air and Zn‐air batteries, have gained renewed interest because of their high theoretical energy density, safety and low cost. The air electrode, with bifunctional electrocatalysts for the oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) and the oxygen evolution reaction (OER), plays the most important role in determining battery performance. Direct deposition of catalysts on the air electrode, using methods such as electrodeposition, electroless deposition, chemical vapor deposition (CVD) and physical vapor deposition (PVD), is shown to be a viable way to fabricate durable and active catalysts with high efficiency and low cost. This review examines recent research activities which apply direct deposition methods to prepare bifunctional catalysts. The benefits and drawbacks of these methods are compared to provide guidelines for their application.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations23
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBatteries & SupercapsSame topicElectrocatalysts for Energy ConversionFrench-language works237,207