2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.jelechem.2011.12.011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Asymmetric Marcus theory: Application to electrode kinetics

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
69
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 48 publications
(69 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
69
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This AMH formula has already demonstrated good agreement with experimental data in numerous studies [9,15,26] and is becoming increasingly important in understanding electrochemical systems, whenever symmetric MHC kinetics fails. Mathematically, however, the model is not well posed.…”
Section: Clarification Of the Amh Modelmentioning
confidence: 52%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…This AMH formula has already demonstrated good agreement with experimental data in numerous studies [9,15,26] and is becoming increasingly important in understanding electrochemical systems, whenever symmetric MHC kinetics fails. Mathematically, however, the model is not well posed.…”
Section: Clarification Of the Amh Modelmentioning
confidence: 52%
“…2 is restricted in applicability based on the truncation of the approximating series by which it was derived [15]. Although the restrictions in relevant parameter ranges vary system to system, conservative estimates require | | < 0.35, 1, and |⌘| .…”
Section: B Asymmetric Marcus-hush Kineticsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Charge transfer coefficients for the cathodic (a c ) and anodic (a a ) reactions were calculated to be 0.108 and 0.908. The large deviation of a from 0.5 implies the force constants for the reactant and the product are unequal (according to the asymmetric Marcus theory), [16] which is in agreement with substantial structural changes upon reduction of 1 to 1 2À . [14] The apparent heterogeneous electron transfer rate constant (k s ) was calculated to be 1.33 AE 0.15 s À1 (see Supporting Information).…”
mentioning
confidence: 66%