ReviewRSC advances2026
Failure mechanisms in redox flow batteries: from apparent capacity decay to active-material loss.
Review in RSC advances, 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
Redox flow batteries (RFBs) are promising for long-duration energy storage, but their capacity decay is often a system-level consequence of coupled crossover, electrolyte imbalance, chemical degradation, interfacial deterioration, deposition instability, and operating-condition perturbations. A major challenge in lifetime diagnosis is that observable capacity loss does not always correspond to irreversible active-material loss; in many cases, it first reflects recoverable imbalance or redistribution of active species. This review introduces the concept of the dominant degradation boundary to identify the constraint that first establishes a persistent capacity limitation under a given chemistry and operating window and that controls the subsequent transition from apparent capacity decay to true active-material loss. Using a boundary-amplification-conversion framework, the degradation pathways of all-vanadium, iron-chromium, zinc-bromine, and organic redox flow batteries are compared. The analysis shows that different RFB chemistries exhibit distinct front-end boundaries, amplification processes, recoverability windows, and true-loss pathways. This framework provides a diagnostic basis for distinguishing recoverable and irreversible capacity decay, comparing degradation behavior across chemistries, and prioritizing mitigation strategies for lifetime extension.
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.