Zinc Electrodeposition in Acetate‐based Water‐in‐Salt Electrolyte: Experimental and Theoretical Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Zinc electroplating has found applications in many fields. The chemical composition of the electrodeposition bath can have a great impact on the final coating quality and the economics of the process. In traditional aqueous electrolytes, zinc deposition competes with the hydrogen evolution and oxygen reduction reactions, which can lead to hydrogen embrittlement of the substrate as well as decrease in efficiency. Highly concentrated water‐in‐salt electrolytes can suppress these reactions significantly. Here, we show that electrodeposition of zinc with high efficiencies can be achieved using an acetate‐based water‐in‐salt electrolyte at room temperature. Nucleation studies confirm that at potentials more negative than −1.30 V vs. Ag/AgCl, the three‐dimensional (3D) nucleation process becomes instantaneous, while at more positive potentials it is progressive. Using two of the most common nucleation and growth models, Scharifker‐Mostany and Mirkin‐Nilov‐Heerman‐Tarallo, nucleation parameters such as the nucleation rate constant and nuclei density are found, showing a good agreement between the two models.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".