Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 254

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

Gauthier, Joseph A., Ringe, Stefan, Dickens, Colin F., Garza, Alejandro J., Bell, Alexis T., Head-Gordon, Martin, Nørskov, Jens K., Chan, Karen·2019·ACS Catalysis

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acscatal.8b02793

Cites

10 of 10 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

Cited by

See all 254

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
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

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.