MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311910624 · doi:10.1088/2515-7655/aca9fd

2023 roadmap on photocatalytic water splitting

2022· article· en· W4311910624 on OpenAlexaff
Detlef W. Bahnemann, Peter K. J. Robertson, Chuanyi Wang, Wonyong Choi, Helen Daly, Mohtaram Danish, Hugo de Lasa, Salvador Escobedo, Christopher Hardacre, Tae Hwa Jeon, Bupmo Kim, Horst Kisch, Wei Li, Mingce Long, M. Muneer, Nathan Skillen, Jingzheng Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Energy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicAdvanced Photocatalysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersScience and Engineering Research BoardEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNational Research Foundation of KoreaUK Catalysis HubNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Research FoundationUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsCarbon footprintHydrogen productionHydrogenWater splittingPhotocatalysisEnvironmental scienceHydrogen economyCarbon fibersZero emissionWaste managementProcess engineeringNanotechnologyGreenhouse gasMaterials scienceEngineeringChemistryCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As a consequence of the issues resulting from global climate change many nations are starting to transition to being low or net zero carbon economies. To achieve this objective practical alternative fuels are urgently required and hydrogen gas is deemed one of the most desirable substitute fuels to traditional hydrocarbons. A significant challenge, however, is obtaining hydrogen from sources with low or zero carbon footprint i.e. so called ‘green’ hydrogen. Consequently, there are a number of strands of research into processes that are practical techniques for the production of this ‘green’ hydrogen. Over the past five decades there has been a significant body of research into photocatalytic (PC)/photoelectrocatalytic processes for hydrogen production through water splitting or water reduction. There have, however been significant issues faced in terms of the practical capability of this promising technology to produce hydrogen at scale. This road map article explores a range of issues related to both PC and photoelectrocatalytic hydrogen generation ranging from basic processes, materials science through to reactor engineering and applications for biomass reforming.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0930.038

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations26
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics EnergySame topicAdvanced Photocatalysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207