Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) are promising clean energy technologies due to their high efficiency, low operating temperature, and environmental compatibility. However, their commercial viability is limited by membrane degradation, which undermines long-term durability. This study reviews the fundamental degradation mechanisms of PEMFC membranes: mechanical stress from hydration cycling, and chemical and thermal stresses; and evaluates accelerated stress testing (AST) as an investigative approach for durability assessment. Standardized U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) chemical and mechanical AST protocols are compared with modified protocols reported in the literature to highlight advancements in test design and execution. Diagnostic tools such as polarization curves, linear sweep voltammetry, cyclic voltammetry, electrochemical impedance spectroscopy, and electrochemical leak detection tests are discussed in relation to hydrogen crossover, membrane thinning, and ionic resistance. Failure criteria, including open-circuit voltage loss, electrochemical leak detection, and high-frequency resistance, are presented to ensure experimental validity. Finally, mitigation strategies such as the use of radical scavengers, reinforced membranes, and chemically stable polymer structures are reviewed to improve membrane durability under accelerated stress conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".