Communication—The Ragone Plot of Supercapacitors Under Different Loading Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The power-energy performance of supercapacitors is usually visualized by the Ragone plot of (gravimetric or volumetric) energy density vs power density. The energy is commonly computed from E = CV 2 /2, and the power from P = E /Δ t , which assume RC -based models. In this study, we investigate the energy-power profiles of two commercial supercapacitors discharged with three different types of loads: (i) constant current, (ii) constant power, and (iii) constant resistive load. The energy is computed as per the definition from the time-integral of its instantaneous power, i.e. E ( t ) = ∫ p ( t ) dt with p ( t ) = i ( t ) v ( t ). In doing so, we do not assume any specific model a priori, and we highlight the fact that supercapacitor performance depends on the type of load it supplies. We also model the experimental Ragone plot using a fractional-order model composed of a resistance and a constant phase element, and show its superiority over the standard RC model.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.045 | 0.010 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".