MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403501021 · doi:10.1016/j.molliq.2024.126233

Ionic liquid reinforced cellulose nanofiber with iron oxide electrocatalyst

2024· article· en· W4403501021 on OpenAlexaff
Chinna Bathula, Abhishek Meena, Aditya Singh, Mohammad Rafe Hatshan, Ramasubba Reddy Palem, Soniya Naik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Molecular Liquids · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicElectrocatalysts for Energy Conversion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersDongguk UniversityKing Saud University
KeywordsIonic liquidCelluloseElectrocatalystFabricationNanofiberOxideChemical engineeringMaterials scienceIonic bondingInorganic chemistryChemistryNanotechnologyElectrodeCatalysisElectrochemistryIonOrganic chemistryMetallurgyPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increased attention has been focused on the preparation of nanoarchitectures for applicability in energy, environmental and biological streams. However, concerns have been raised regarding environmental effects due to the harsh chemicals used in such preparations. To overcome this issue, the present study reports the use of a green solvent, 1-methyl-3-propyl-1H-imidazol-3-ium iodide or [Pmim]I, for the preparation of cellulose nanofiber-iron oxide (CNF-Fe 2 O 3 ) composite. The as-prepared nanofiber composite is characterized with the aid of analytical tools such as X-ray diffraction (XRD), Fourier-transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, field-emission scanning electron microscopy/energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (FE-SEM/EDX), and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS). As a proof-of-concept demonstration, the resulting nanostructure is employed as an electrocatalyst and is compared with the bare CNFs, non-cellulose NFs and a standard RuO 2 catalyst. The results indicate that the CNF-Fe 2 O 3 composite achieves a standard current density (j) of 10 mA cm −2 at only 260 mV compared to 280, 290, and 370 mV for the standard RuO 2 , the bare CNFs, and non-cellulose nanofibers (NFs), respectively. These differences become more prominent at a high current density of 100 mA cm −2 , where the CNF-Fe 2 O 3 requires only 310 mV, while the CNFs, RuO 2 , and NFs consume 360, 370, and 550 mV, respectively.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Molecular LiquidsSame topicElectrocatalysts for Energy ConversionFrench-language works237,207