Nanoparticles for Active and Sustainable Fuel Cell Cathodes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depletion of fossil fuels and environmental pollution raised interest in new technologies for sustainable energy production, conversion, and storage, among which fuel cell technology is greatly studied, in both academia and industry. Proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) are reputed energy devices, due to their high conversion efficiency and low environmental pollution.1 Nowadays, Pt-based catalysts exhibit the best electrocatalytic activity towards oxygen reduction reaction (ORR), but enhancing their catalytic efficiency and reducing costs are essential for commercializing fuel cell technology.2 Our interest relies with the development of Pt-based nanoalloys2,4 via solution organometallic chemistry approach.3 This approach allows control over the composition, structure, and morphology of metal nanoparticles, and could lead to increased catalytic activity and long-term stability by revealing more active sites of the catalyst. Additionally, the ability to alloy with a range of metals for producing bimetallic compounds is one of the key advantages of this approach. In this communication, the synthesis of Pt-based nanoparticles and their characterization by state-of-the-art techniques such as ICP, EA, IR, TEM and HR-TEM will be described. The influence of the Pt complexes used as precursors and of the reaction conditions on the morphology of the Pt nanoparticles will be shown. The obtained nanostructures offer interesting starting materials to incorporate other metals, such as transition or rare earth metals, in order to have nanoalloys and study their performance in ORR in comparison to pure Pt catalysts. References [1] X. Tang, D. Fang, L. Qu, D. Xu, X. Qin, B. Qin, W. Song, Z. Shao, B. Yi, Chin. J. Catal. 2019, 40, 504–514. [2] X. Ren, Q. Lv, L. Liu, B. Liu, Y. Wang, A. Liu, G. Wu, Sustain. Energy Fuels 2019, 4, 15–30. [3] C. Amiens, B. Chaudret, D. Ciuculescu-Pradines, V. Collière, K. Fajerwerg, P. Fau, M. Kahn, A. Maisonnat, K. Soulantica, K. Philippot, New J. Chem. 2013, 37, 3374–3401. [4] J. Greeley, I.E.L Stephens, A. S Bondarenko, T. P. Johansson, H.A. Hansen, T. F Jaramillo, J. Rossmeisl, I. Chorkendorff, J.K. Nørskov, Nat. Chem. 2009, 1, 552–556.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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".