MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392462478 · doi:10.1016/j.coelec.2024.101468

The rebirth of urea oxidation reaction for power-to-X and beyond

2024· article· en· W4392462478 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Joudi Dabboussi, Rüdiger‐A. Eichel, Hans Kungl, Rawa Abdallah, Gabriel Loget

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Electrochemistry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCatalytic Processes in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Circulatory and Respiratory HealthCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsUreaChemistryPower (physics)RedoxMaterials scienceNanotechnologyInorganic chemistryOrganic chemistryPhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the longstanding interest in urea oxidation reaction (UOR), the identification of reaction products under conventional conditions was only reported recently. It turns out that the initially thought “sustainable pathway”, leading to harmless products, represents just a small fraction of the overall reaction mechanism. This is detrimental as the use of urea-rich aqueous feeds for H2 production, along with their remediation through UOR, constitutes perhaps the most important added value of this process for power-to-X and clinical applications. Nonetheless, promising strategies favoring the formation of environmentally friendly products over harmful overoxidized ones already exist. This is expected to lead to a “rebirth” of this research field and open the quest for ultimate selectivity to ensure the complete sustainability of UOR. Therefore, the systematic analysis of reaction products, the elucidation of mechanisms for improving N2 faradaic efficiency, and the design of selective catalysts should be the next focus of research in the field of UOR.

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in ElectrochemistrySame topicCatalytic Processes in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207