ArticleACS omega2026
Generative AI Driven Process Calculations for Fuel Cells and Flow Batteries.
Article in ACS omega, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electrochemical energy systems such as proton-exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs), solid-oxide fuel cells (SOFCs), and vanadium redox flow batteries (VRFBs) are governed by strongly coupled, nonlinear transport-kinetics equations spanning multiple scales. Mechanistic solvers provide physical fidelity but impose modeling and software burdens that hinder rapid iteration, while purely data-driven surrogates, such as artificial neural networks (ANNs) and deep reinforcement learning (DRL), can be brittle under distribution shift. This paper proposes a Generative AI assisted computational framework that utilizes large language models (LLMs) to orchestrate retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), physics-constrained prompting, and tool-integrated reasoning for electrochemical process calculations. We evaluate this framework on two complementary data sets: (1) synthetic data from physics-based simulators for controlled benchmarking, and (2) Aspen Plus data from high-fidelity industrial process simulations validated against experimental measurements. For PEMFC polarization curve decomposition, the framework achieves RMSE of 9.6 mV (synthetic) and 7.8 mV (Aspen data), with constraint violations reduced from 48%/42% to 1.2%/0.5% respectively. For VRFB optimization, energy efficiency reaches 79.1% (synthetic) and 74.9% (Aspen data). The dual-data set evaluation demonstrates robustness across data characteristics while a preliminary user study (
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.