X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy Analysis of Nafion-Containing Samples: Pitfalls, Protocols, and Perceptions of Physicochemical Properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) is one of the most common techniques used to analyze the surface composition of catalysts and support materials used in polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) fuel cells and electrolyzers, providing important insights for further improvement of their properties. Characterization of catalyst layers (CLs) is more challenging, which can be at least partially attributed to the instability of ionomer materials such as Nafion during measurements. This work explores the stability of Nafion during XPS measurements, illuminating and addressing Nafion degradation concerns. The extent of Nafion damage as a function of XPS instrumentation, measurement conditions, and sample properties was evaluated across multiple instruments. Results revealed that significant Nafion damage to the ion-conducting sulfonic acid species (>50% loss in sulfur signal) may occur in a relatively short time frame (tens of minutes) depending on the exact nature of the sample and XPS instrument. This motivated the development and validation of a multipoint XPS data acquisition protocol that minimizes Nafion damage, resulting in reliable data acquisition by avoiding significant artifacts from Nafion instability. The developed protocol was then used to analyze both thin film ionomer samples and Pt/C-based CLs. Comparison of PEM fuel cell CLs to Nafion thin films revealed several changes in Nafion spectral features attributed to charge transfer due to interaction with conductive catalyst and support species. This study provides a method to reliably characterize ionomer-containing samples, facilitating fundamental studies of the catalyst-ionomer interface and more applied investigations of structure-processing-performance correlations in PEM fuel cell and electrolyzer CLs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".