MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970208607 · doi:10.1149/2.0161913jes

Stochastic Modelling For Controlling the Structure of Sintered Titanium Powder-Based Porous Transport Layers for Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Electrolyzers

2019· article· en· W2970208607 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Keonhag Lee, Aimy Bazylak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicHybrid Renewable Energy Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceElectrolytePorosityElectrolysisComposite materialPorous mediumTitaniumPermeability (electromagnetism)SeedingPolymerMembraneMetallurgyElectrodeChemistryThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A stochastic modelling technique for simulating sintered titanium powder-based porous transport layers (PTLs) of the polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) electrolyzer was developed and used to generate PTLs with varying structures and transport properties. Two stochastic parameters (seeding parameter and the filling radius) were introduced in the model to control the powder-based PTL structure. The seeding parameter was used to control the titanium particle packing density, whereby increasing the packing density led to smaller the mean pore and throat diameters. The filling radius was used to create and control the sinter neck and grain morphology. Larger filling radii resulted in larger mean pore and throat sizes. PTLs with larger pores and throats exhibited higher single-phase permeabilities. A representative PTL was numerically generated with a single-phase permeability that deviated from the commercial benchmark by only 2%. Specifically, this work can be used to inform state-of-the-art manufacturing procedures so that the spatial distribution of the particles and their sinter necks can be tailored to achieve prescribed transport properties for enhanced PEM electrolyzer performance.

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 score0.474
Threshold uncertainty score0.902

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Electrochemical SocietySame topicHybrid Renewable Energy SystemsFrench-language works237,207