Fig. 2: The correlation between different electrochemical measurement techniques: EIS performed at the 2nd and 24th hour Z2h and Z24h, potentiodynamic polarisation performed at 24th-hour jcorr, LPR performed at the 24th hour \({\left.{R}_{{\rm {p}}}\right\vert }_{24\,{\rm {h}}}\) and the time-weighted average of LPR measurements \(\left\langle {R}_{{\rm {p}}}\right\rangle\). | npj Materials Degradation

Fig. 2: The correlation between different electrochemical measurement techniques: EIS performed at the 2nd and 24th hour Z2h and Z24h, potentiodynamic polarisation performed at 24th-hour jcorr, LPR performed at the 24th hour \({\left.{R}_{{\rm {p}}}\right\vert }_{24\,{\rm {h}}}\) and the time-weighted average of LPR measurements \(\left\langle {R}_{{\rm {p}}}\right\rangle\).

From: Laying the experimental foundation for corrosion inhibitor discovery through machine learning

Fig. 2

a Example correlation between Z24h and \(\left\langle {R}_{{\rm {p}}}\right\rangle\), values from electrochemical measurements converted into top: inhibition efficiency, bottom: inhibition power. Each dot represents an individual measurement, categorised in colours with respect to their inhibitor species. b Pearson correlation coefficients between different electrochemical measurements, converted in top-right triangle: inhibition efficiency, bottom-left triangle: inhibition power metrics.

Back to article page