MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410352903 · doi:10.1016/j.energy.2025.136597

Experimental investigation and assessment of a new direct urea-hydrogen peroxide fuel cell stack

2025· article· en· W4410352903 on OpenAlexaff
Ayse Sinem Meke, İbrahim Dinçer

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStack (abstract data type)Fuel cellsHydrogen peroxideUreaChemistryNuclear engineeringWaste managementEngineeringMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceChemical engineeringComputer scienceOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study addresses the existing technology gaps in fuel cell development by investigating the design and performance assessment of a Direct Urea-Hydrogen Peroxide Fuel Cell (DUHPFC) stack. A significant focus was placed on the preparation of electrodes, where nickel zinc iron oxide was successfully deposited on stainless steel foil via electrodeposition, resulting in high-activity, stable anodes. The 16-cell fuel cell stack was tested under various conditions, with optimal performance observed at 65°C, achieving a power output of 0.307 kW and an open circuit voltage (OCV) of 8.8 V. The energy and exergy efficiencies at 65°C were 48.88% and 41.27%, respectively, highlighting the crucial role of temperature optimization. The electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) measurements showed a reduction in impedance from 30 Ωcm 2 at 25°C to 15 Ωcm 2 at 65°C, suggesting improved charge transfer characteristics and reduced internal resistance, which contribute to enhanced fuel cell performance. These findings not only demonstrate the efficiency and scalability of the DUHPFC stack for large-scale energy applications but also address the need for more efficient and scalable fuel cell technologies by offering a viable solution to harness urea as a sustainable fuel source.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergySame topicFuel Cells and Related MaterialsFrench-language works237,207