MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036669261 · doi:10.1002/aenm.202001275

Graphene Quantum Dots‐Based Advanced Electrode Materials: Design, Synthesis and Their Applications in Electrochemical Energy Storage and Electrocatalysis

2020· article· en· W3036669261 on OpenAlexafffund
Wenwen Liu, Matthew Li, Gaopeng Jiang, Gaoran Li, Jianbing Zhu, Meiling Xiao, Yanfei Zhu, Rui Gao, Aiping Yu, Ming Feng, Zhongwei Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Energy Materials · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon and Quantum Dots Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersUniversity of WaterlooNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsElectrocatalystNanomaterialsMaterials scienceNanotechnologyGrapheneSupercapacitorQuantum dotElectrochemical energy conversionEnergy storageHeteroatomElectrochemical energy storageElectrochemistryElectrodeChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Graphene quantum dots (GQDs) have aroused great interest in the scientific community in recent years due to their unique physicochemical properties and potential applications in different fields. To date, much research has been conducted on the ingenious design and rational construction of GQDs‐based nanomaterials used as electrode materials and/or electrocatalysts. Despite these efforts, research on the efficient synthesis and application of GQDs‐based nanomaterials is still in the early stages of development and timely updates of recent research progress on new design concepts, synthetic strategies, and significant breakthroughs in GQDs‐based nanomaterials are highly desired. In light of the above, the effect of synthetic methods on the final product of the GQDs, the GQDs synthesis mechanism, and specific perspectives regarding the effect of the unique surface and structural properties of GQDs (e.g., defects, heteroatom doping, surface/edge state, size, conductivity) on the electrochemical energy‐related systems are discussed in‐depth in this review. Additionally, this review also focuses on the design of GQDs‐based composites and their applications in the fields of electrochemical energy storage (e.g., supercapacitors and batteries) and electrocatalysis (e.g., fuel cell, water splitting, CO 2 reduction), along with constructive suggestions for addressing the remaining challenges in the field.

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: none
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
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations203
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Energy MaterialsSame topicCarbon and Quantum Dots ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207