Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 282

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of electrochemical active surface area methods for various nickel nanostructures

Cossar, Emily, Houache, Mohamed S.E., Zhang, Zhihao, Baranova, Elena A.·2020·Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry

Abstract

Abstract Electrochemical processes, such as energy conversion and storage, water electrolysis and other electrocatalytic processes call for expensive noble metal catalysts to provide efficient performance of their systems. The use of those expensive catalysts does not allow for feasible industrial scale operation of such processes. Researchers have therefore moved their focus to non-noble metals such as nickel (Ni), which are inexpensive yet still have high catalytic performance. When evaluating electrochemical performance, it is imperative to quantify the electrochemical active surface area (ECSA) of the materials, however for Ni-based materials, this has proven to be quite challenging. In this study, four ECSA methods are compared for four Ni-based nanostructured catalysts as well as polycrystalline Ni, to determine whether one method is more representative than the other, or whether the appropriate method depends on the type of Ni being used. The tested methods were carried out in an alkaline environment and were based on (i) the double layer capacitance obtained through non-faradaic charging by cyclic voltammetry as well as the charge associated to (ii) the α-Ni(OH)2 oxidation peak, (iii) the β-NiOOH reduction peak and finally (iv) the β-NiOOH reduction peak in the presence of oxalic acid. The methods were applied to Ni wire, various shaped Ni nanoparticles (NPs) such as triangle, urchin and spherical, as well as Ni foams. Electrochemical results of this study, along with scanning and transmission electron microscopy (SEM and TEM) and X-ray diffraction (XRD) analyses are reported and a detailed discussion on the applicability of the methods is provided.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jelechem.2020.114246

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 36 references

Metadata

Authors
Cossar, E., Houache, M. S. E., Zhang, Z., & Baranova, E. A.
Venue
Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-08
Volume
870
Pages
114246
ISSN
1572-6657 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3027609439
Cited by
282
References
36
FWCI
5.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of electrochemical active surface area methods for various nickel nanostructures. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jelechem.2020.114246
The paper
Cossar, E., Houache, M. S. E., Zhang, Z., & Baranova, E. A. (2020). Comparison of electrochemical active surface area methods for various nickel nanostructures. Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2020.114246

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.