MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311477654 · doi:10.1002/adfm.202209733

An Epoxy‐Free Sample Preparation Approach to Enable Imaging of Ionomer and Carbon in Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Cells

2022· article· en· W4311477654 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Peyman Soleymani, Marcia Reid, Jasna Janković

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Functional Materials · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMaterials scienceIonomerEpoxyProton exchange membrane fuel cellCarbon fibersTransmission electron microscopyMicrostructurePolymerElectrolyteMembraneElectron tomographyChemical engineeringMembrane electrode assemblyElectrodeNanotechnologyFuel cellsComposite materialScanning transmission electron microscopyCopolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Performance and durability of electrodes in proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs), as one of the most promising zero‐emission power generation technologies, depend on the composition, microstructure, and distribution of its components—metal catalyst, carbon support, and ionomer. Their improvement requires an in‐depth understanding of the electrodes’ structure‐property‐performance relationship, for which transmission electron microscopy (TEM) has been an invaluable tool. However, the conventional TEM sample preparation, namely epoxy‐embedding ultramicrotomy, poses impediments in imaging ionomer and distinguishing it from carbon. Therefore, in this research, an epoxy‐free ultramicrotome technique is implemented on beginning‐of‐life (BOL) and end‐of‐life (EOL) PEMFC samples. For the first time, TEM and electron tomography‐TEM images reveals fascinating details of the ionomer network, carbon particles’ structure, and Pt distribution in BOL, as well as their structural changes after the cell degradation. Finally, the structural descriptors, extracted by a proprietary quantification method, are correlated with visual observations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.207
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations21
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Functional MaterialsSame topicFuel Cells and Related MaterialsFrench-language works237,207