MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176983082 · doi:10.1002/smll.202100323

Recent Development of Electrocatalytic CO<sub>2</sub> Reduction Application to Energy Conversion

2021· review· en· W3176983082 on OpenAlexaff
Feng Liang, Kaiwen Zhang, Lei Zhang, Yingjie Zhang, Yong Lei, Xueliang Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueSmall · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicCO2 Reduction Techniques and Catalysts
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFaraday efficiencyElectrochemistryMaterials scienceCarbon fibersGreenhouse gasElectricity generationTransition metalEnergy transformationElectricityNanotechnologyProcess (computing)Process engineeringCatalysisChemistryComputer scienceElectrodeEngineeringOrganic chemistryPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emission has caused greenhouse gas pollution worldwide. Hence, strengthening CO 2 recycling is necessary. CO 2 electroreduction reaction (CRR) is recognized as a promising approach to utilize waste CO 2 . Electrocatalysts in the CRR process play a critical role in determining the selectivity and activity of CRR. Different types of electrocatalysts are introduced in this review: noble metals and their derived compounds, transition metals and their derived compounds, organic polymer, and carbon‐based materials, as well as their major products, Faradaic efficiency, current density, and onset potential. Furthermore, this paper overviews the recent progress of the following two major applications of CRR according to the different energy conversion methods: electricity generation and formation of valuable carbonaceous products. Considering electricity generation devices, the electrochemical properties of metal–CO 2 batteries, including Li–CO 2 , Na–CO 2 , Al–CO 2 , and Zn–CO 2 batteries, are mainly summarized. Finally, different pathways of CO 2 electroreduction to carbon‐based fuels is presented, and their reaction mechanisms are illustrated. This review provides a clear and innovative insight into the entire reaction process of CRR, guiding the new electrocatalysts design, state‐of‐the‐art analysis technique application, and reaction system innovation.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations94
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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