A 2023 update on the performance of ionic-liquid proton-exchange-membrane fuel cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A mini-review is provided of the literature concerning the performance of proton-exchange-membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) containing (immobilized) ionic liquids as possible electrolytes, focusing on papers reporting performance metrics (power and current densities). For over a decade, and especially for combined heat and power applications, there has been a drive to design an ionic-liquid-holding membrane that could operate well under non-humidifying (water-free) conditions above 100°C. Such a goal has not yet been achieved: reported power densities are still below those of traditional low-temperature fuel cells. Other recent reviews have already pointed to three main issues: poor conductivity, poor cathode (oxygen-reduction) kinetics, and seepage of the liquid from the membrane. In this review, IL-PEMFCs are grouped into three IL classes (protic, aprotic, and polymerized), performance metric data are summarized, the cases producing the top ten peak power densities of the last 5 years are discussed, and the conductivity mechanisms of the leading cases are elucidated. Purely vehicular protic ILs appear to be too slow, and the trend toward enhanced Grotthuss H + relays via polymerized ILs is revealed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".