MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024463925 · doi:10.1149/ma2020-01371569mtgabs

Simple Deposition of Metal Salts on Graphene Oxide As Novel Water Oxidation Catalysts

2020· article· en· W3024463925 on OpenAlexaff
Holly M. Fruehwald, Reza B. Moghaddam, Olena V. Zenkina, E. Bradley Easton

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicElectrocatalysts for Energy Conversion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrapheneOxideRutheniumCatalysisMaterials scienceRuthenium oxideMetalChemical engineeringGraphite oxideWater splittingGraphiteNanotechnologyRenewable energyInorganic chemistryChemistryComposite materialOrganic chemistryMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As populations grow world-wide, there is an ever increasing need for more sustainable and renewable energy sources to keep up with the high demand of energy needed. One promising high energy source is the water splitting reaction where water is split into hydrogen and oxygen gas. However, the materials usually required to facilitate this reaction are often rare and expensive earth metals such as iridium. Thus, the focus has been on using Ir-free materials as a cost-efficient alternative. One such metal is ruthenium, Ru is ideal as it has many oxidation states to help facilitate the water splitting reaction, to aid in reducing the over potentials[1]. Yet, ruthenium-based materials have problems such as being prone to stability issues in acidic media, high over potentials and slow kinetics, so improvements should be made on catalyst design to lower over potentials and improve stability. On the other hand, Ru can also be considered a somewhat rare metal, thus further inexpensive and non-precious metals should be used in the future designs of these materials to lower cost without sacrificing activity. In this work we synthesized graphene oxide electrochemically from a graphite rod source, using a simple, low cost method[2]. Graphene was chosen to stabilize the nanoparticles and enhance the conductivity of the resulting materials. Metal nanoparticles from either a Ru(III) or Ru(VII) salt precursor were deposited on the surface of the graphene oxide using a facile method of preparation to afford a ca. 3% metal loading on the graphene oxide. The materials were examined electrochemically in acidic media for the water oxidation reaction, where we observed low over potentials for the reaction and high stability during prolonged testing[3]. Now, we are comparing the activity of these metals and other non-precious metals for their water oxidation activity in basic electrolyte. These novel metal nanoparticles stabilized on a graphene could aid in the development of cost efficient and sustainable materials for the future of renewable energy technologies. [1] Kamdar, J.M.; Grotjahn, D.B. Molecules 2019, 24, 494. [2] Liu, J.; Poh C. K.; Zhan, D.; Lai, L; Lim, S. H.; Wang, L.; Liu, X.; Sahoo, N. G.; Li, C.; Shen, Z.; Lin, J. Nano Energy. 2013, 3, 377-386 [3] Fruehwald, H. M.; Moghaddam, R. B.; Zekina, O. V.; Easton, E. B., Cat. Sci. Technol. 2019, 9, 6547-6551

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicElectrocatalysts for Energy ConversionFrench-language works237,207