The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Challenges in Modeling Electrochemical Reaction Energetics with Polarizable Continuum Models
Abstract
A major challenge in the modeling of electrochemical phenomena is the accurate description of the interface between an electrolyte and a charged conductor. Polarizable continuum models (PCM) have been gaining popularity because they offer a computationally inexpensive method of modeling the electrolyte. In this Perspective, we discuss challenges from using one such model which treats the ions using a linearized Poisson–Boltzmann (LPB) distribution. From a physical perspective, this model places charge unphysically close to the surface and adsorbates, and it includes excessively steep ramping of the dielectric constant from the surface to the bulk solvent. Both of these issues can be somewhat mitigated by adjusting parameters built into the model, but in doing so, the resultant capacitance deviates from experimental values. Likewise, hybrid explicit-implicit approaches to the solvent may offer a more realistic description of hydrogen bonding and solvation to reaction intermediates, but the corresponding capacitances also deviate from experimental values. These deviations highlight the need for a careful adjustment of parameters in order to reproduce not only solvation energies but also other physical properties of solid–liquid interfaces. Continuum approaches alone also necessarily do not capture local variations in the electric field from cations at the interface, which can affect the energetics of intermediates with substantial dipoles or polarizability. Finally, since the double-layer charge can be varied continuously, LPB/PCM models provide a way to determine electrochemical barriers at constant potential. However, double-layer charging and the atomic motion associated with reaction events occur on significantly different timescales. We suggest that more detailed approaches, such as the modified Poisson–Boltzmann model and/or the addition of a Stern layer, may be able to mitigate some but not all of the challenges discussed.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Origin of the Overpotential for Oxygen Reduction at a Fuel-Cell Cathode
Nørskov, J. K., Rossmeisl, J., Logadottir, A., Lindqvist, L., Kitchin, J. R., Bligaard, T., & Jónsson, H. (2004) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry B · doi:10.1021/jp047349j · Cited by 13,153
Self-citationUniversality in Oxygen Evolution Electrocatalysis on Oxide Surfaces
Man, I. C., Su, H., Calle‐Vallejo, F., Hansen, H. A., Martínez, J. I., Inoglu, N. G., Kitchin, J., Jaramillo, T. F., Nørskov, J. K., & Rossmeisl, J. (2011) · ChemCatChem · doi:10.1002/cctc.201000397 · Cited by 4,769
Self-citationComputational high-throughput screening of electrocatalytic materials for hydrogen evolution
Greeley, J., Jaramillo, T. F., Bonde, J., Chorkendorff, I., & Nørskov, J. K. (2006) · Nature Materials · doi:10.1038/nmat1752 · Cited by 4,097
Self-citationAlloys of platinum and early transition metals as oxygen reduction electrocatalysts
Greeley, J., Stephens, I. E. L., Bondarenko, A. S., Johansson, T. P., Hansen, H. A., Jaramillo, T. F., Rossmeisl, J., Chorkendorff, I., & Nørskov, J. K. (2009) · Nature Chemistry · doi:10.1038/nchem.367 · Cited by 3,203
Self-citationHelmholtz, H. (1853) · Annalen der Physik · doi:10.1002/andp.18531650603 · Cited by 989
Electric Field Effects in Electrochemical CO 2 Reduction
Chen, L. D., Urushihara, M., Chan, K., & Nørskov, J. K. (2016) · ACS Catalysis · doi:10.1021/acscatal.6b02299 · Cited by 702
Self-citationGoodpaster, J. D., Bell, A. T., & Head-Gordon, M. (2016) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters · doi:10.1021/acs.jpclett.6b00358 · Cited by 702
Self-citationLetchworth-Weaver, K., & Arias, T. A. (2012) · Physical Review B · doi:10.1103/physrevb.86.075140 · Cited by 351
Dielectric Constant of Water Confined in a Nanocavity
Senapati, S., & Chandra, A. (2001) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry B · doi:10.1021/jp011058i · Cited by 302
Assessing a First-Principles Model of an Electrochemical Interface by Comparison with Experiment
Steinmann, S. N., & Sautet, P. (2016) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry C · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b01938 · Cited by 120
Cited by
Advances and challenges in understanding the electrocatalytic conversion of carbon dioxide to fuels
Birdja, Y. Y., Pérez-Gallent, E., Figueiredo, M. C., Göttle, A. J., Calle-Vallejo, F., & Koper, M. T. M. (2019) · Nature Energy · doi:10.1038/s41560-019-0450-y · Cited by 2,747
Theoretical Modeling of Electrochemical Proton-Coupled Electron Transfer
Warburton, R. E., Soudackov, A. V., & Hammes-Schiffer, S. (2022) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00929 · Cited by 322
Metadata
- Authors
- Gauthier, J. A., Ringe, S., Dickens, C. F., Garza, A. J., Bell, A. T., Head-Gordon, M., Nørskov, J. K., & Chan, K.
- Venue
- ACS Catalysis
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2018-11-28
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 920-931
- ISSN
- 2155-5435 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2902697889
- Cited by
- 254
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 10.40
- 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: Challenges in Modeling Electrochemical Reaction Energetics with Polarizable Continuum Models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/acscatal.8b02793
- The paper
- Gauthier, J. A., Ringe, S., Dickens, C. F., Garza, A. J., Bell, A. T., Head-Gordon, M., Nørskov, J. K., & Chan, K. (2019). Challenges in Modeling Electrochemical Reaction Energetics with Polarizable Continuum Models. ACS Catalysis. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.8b02793
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.