MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414280424 · doi:10.3390/ma18184354

Anion Exchange Ionomer Binders for Alkaline Fuel Cells

2025· review· en· W4414280424 on OpenAlexafffund
Alannah C. Gowling, Kelly M. Meek

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIonomerIon exchangeElectrochemistryElectrodePolymerMembraneAlkaline fuel cellFuel cells

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anion exchange ionomer (AEI) binders are critical to the performance of alkaline electrochemical devices (i.e., fuel cells, electrolyzers, and batteries), as they facilitate ion transport, provide structural integrity, and improve the overall performance and lifespan of these devices. These binders not only ensure ion transport but also provide mechanical stability to the electrode materials. Recently, there has been significant progress in designing AEIs that are more compatible with existing electrode materials and electrolytes. This review summarizes the different types of AEI binders, focusing on their chemical structure, functionalization, conductivity, and how they affect the performance of alkaline fuel cells, specifically, anion exchange membrane fuel cells (AEMFCs). It also discusses how factors like functional groups, polymer backbone and side-chain flexibility, and ion exchange capacity balance conductivity, mechanical strength, and water uptake (WU). Recent advances in material design, such as polymer blends, composites, and crosslinked ionomers, as well as electrode setup, such as asymmetric ionomer electrodes, are explored as methods for improving stability and ion transport. The main challenges facing AEIs, including water management, alkaline degradation, phase separation, mechanical robustness, and long-term durability, are discussed along with strategies for overcoming them. Finally, we outline future research directions for developing scalable, economical solutions and integrating these binders with new electrode materials to help improve the performance and stability of next-generation AEMFCs.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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