MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223907046 · doi:10.1002/jctb.7094

Nickel‐based anodes in anion exchange membrane water electrolysis: a review

2022· review· en· W4223907046 on OpenAlexafffund
Emily Cossar, Frédéric Murphy, Elena A. Baranova

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicElectrocatalysts for Energy Conversion
Canadian institutionsCentre in Green Chemistry and CatalysisUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAnodeElectrolysisNickelCatalysisAlkaline water electrolysisElectrocatalystElectrolysis of waterIon exchangeMaterials scienceOxygen evolutionChemical engineeringNanotechnologyInorganic chemistryChemistryElectrolyteElectrodeMetallurgyIonElectrochemistryOrganic chemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND Anion exchange membrane water electrolysis (AEMWE) is a promising technology for efficiently producing low‐cost hydrogen (H 2 ). Of the two half‐cell reactions in AEMWE, the oxygen evolution reaction (OER) is kinetically sluggish, requiring an electrocatalyst to promote the reaction. Nickel (Ni) is a promising non‐noble metal catalyst for OER due to its low cost, high stability, and activity in alkaline media. In an AEMWE, Ni particles form a catalytic layer bound together using an anion exchange ionomer (AEI), which also serves to provide hydroxide ion transport throughout the layer. RESULTS In this review, reports of lab synthesized Ni particle‐based anode catalytic layers with AEIs, used specifically in AEMWE devices, are summarized from 2015 onwards to highlight the recent research and development of active Ni‐based AEMWE anodes. The synthesis and electrode fabrication method for the anodes is analyzed to offer a perspective on the feasibility of industrial scale AEMWE. As ionomeric binders are an important component of AEMWE anodes, the ionomer type and loading used with the Ni‐based particles is also summarized with a focus on how those parameters affect catalytic performance. CONCLUSION The literature analysis performed in this work demonstrates the potential of the AEMWE process and provides recommendations for future work on furthering the current understanding of the interactions between the various components of the system. Additionally, it is recommended that future research efforts be focused on further understanding how developed materials perform in a working AEMWE device. © 2022 Society of Chemical Industry (SCI).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations38
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chemical Technology & BiotechnologySame topicElectrocatalysts for Energy ConversionFrench-language works237,207