Novel engineering of ruthenium‐based electrocatalysts for acidic water oxidation: A mini review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The oxygen evolution reaction (OER) is pivotally involved in proton exchange membrane water electrolyzers (PEMWEs). However, the commercialized iridium‐based catalysts often suffer from severe sluggish kinetics, eventually deteriorating the polarization and overall PEMWEs performance. Therefore, to develop OER electrocatalysts with promising reaction kinetics and high stability is of great significance for PEMWEs. Compared to iridium, the ruthenium‐based catalysts possess lower price and higher activity in acidic water oxidation, which promises Ru‐based materials to replace the state‐of‐the‐art IrOx. Yet, the less stable ruthenium than iridium impedes its real applications. In this mini review, recent knowledge of feasible engineering strategies for migrating the Ru‐based electrocatalysts' stability is summarized. In order to improve performance and durability, basic fundamentals of acidic OER on nanoscale and molecular engineered Ru‐based electrocatalysts are briefly introduced. In the end, the challenges and outlook for engineering novel Ru‐based electrocatalysts are presented.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".