MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022894010 · doi:10.3390/catal10050481

In Situ Spectroscopic Methods for Electrocatalytic CO2 Reduction

2020· article· en· W3022894010 on OpenAlexaff
Lei Jin, Ali Seifitokaldani

Bibliographic record

VenueCatalysts · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicCO2 Reduction Techniques and Catalysts
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsElectrocatalystNanotechnologyMaterials scienceElectrochemistryRaman spectroscopyProcess engineeringComputer scienceBiochemical engineeringEnvironmental scienceChemistryElectrodePhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrochemical reduction of CO2 to value-added chemicals and fuels is a promising approach to store renewable energy while closing the anthropogenic carbon cycle. Despite significant advances in developing new electrocatalysts, this system still lacks enough energy conversion efficiency to become a viable technology for industrial applications. To develop an active and selective electrocatalyst and engineer the reaction environment to achieve high energy conversion efficiency, we need to improve our knowledge of the reaction mechanism and material structure under reaction conditions. In situ spectroscopies are among the most powerful tools which enable measurements of the system under real conditions. These methods provide information about reaction intermediates and possible reaction pathways, electrocatalyst structure and active sites, as well as the effect of the reaction environment on products distribution. This review aims to highlight the utilization of in situ spectroscopic methods that enhance our understanding of the CO2 reduction reaction. Infrared, Raman, X-ray absorption, X-ray photoelectron, and mass spectroscopies are discussed here. The critical challenges associated with current state-of-the-art systems are identified and insights on emerging prospects are discussed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations62
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatalystsSame topicCO2 Reduction Techniques and CatalystsFrench-language works237,207