MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995478333 · doi:10.1021/acsenergylett.9b02356

Voltage Matters When Reducing CO<sub>2</sub> in an Electrochemical Flow Cell

2019· article· en· W2995478333 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Energy Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicCO2 Reduction Techniques and Catalysts
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Resources CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsColumbia universityLibrary scienceMedia studiesComputer scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ADVERTISEMENT RETURN TO ISSUEPREVViewpointNEXTVoltage Matters When Reducing CO2 in an Electrochemical Flow CellDanielle SalvatoreDanielle SalvatoreDepartment of Chemical and Biological Engineering, The University of British Columbia, 2360 East Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z3, CanadaMore by Danielle Salvatore and Curtis P. Berlinguette*Curtis P. BerlinguetteDepartment of Chemical and Biological Engineering, The University of British Columbia, 2360 East Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z3, CanadaDepartment of Chemistry, The University of British Columbia, 2036 Main Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z1, CanadaStewart Blusson Quantum Matter Institute, The University of British Columbia, 2355 East Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z4, CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIFAR), 661 University Avenue, Toronto, M5G 1M1 Ontario Canada*E-mail: [email protected]More by Curtis P. Berlinguettehttp://orcid.org/0000-0001-6875-849XCite this: ACS Energy Lett. 2020, 5, 1, 215–220Publication Date (Web):December 16, 2019Publication History Received28 October 2019Accepted2 December 2019Published online16 December 2019Published inissue 10 January 2020https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsenergylett.9b02356https://doi.org/10.1021/acsenergylett.9b02356article-commentaryACS PublicationsCopyright © 2019 American Chemical Society. This publication is available under these Terms of Use. Request reuse permissions This publication is free to access through this site. Learn MoreArticle Views15873Altmetric-Citations130LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICSArticle Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated. Share Add toView InAdd Full Text with ReferenceAdd Description ExportRISCitationCitation and abstractCitation and referencesMore Options Share onFacebookTwitterWechatLinked InRedditEmail PDF (2 MB) Get e-AlertscloseSupporting Info (1)»Supporting Information Supporting Information SUBJECTS:Electrochemical cells,Electrodes,Electrolytic cells,Fuel cells,Membranes Get e-Alerts

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.197 · 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