Synthesis, Electrochemical Properties, and Thermal Stability of Al-Doped LiNi[sub 1∕3]Mn[sub 1∕3]Co[sub (1∕3−z)]Al[sub z]O[sub 2] Positive Electrode Materials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Al-doped Li [ Ni 1 ∕ 3 Mn 1 ∕ 3 Co ( 1 ∕ 3 − z ) Al z ] O 2 ( 0 ⩽ z ⩽ 0.14 ) samples were synthesized using a coprecipitation method followed by calcination with Li O H ⋅ H 2 O at 500 ° C for 3 h and 900 ° C for 3 h . Electrochemical testing showed that Li [ Ni 1 ∕ 3 Mn 1 ∕ 3 Co ( 1 ∕ 3 − z ) Al z ] O 2 had a high initial discharge capacity and good charge–discharge cycle performance in the voltage ranges of either 2.5–4.3 or 2.5 – 4.6 V . The impact of Al doping on the thermal stability of Li [ Ni 1 ∕ 3 Mn 1 ∕ 3 Co ( 1 ∕ 3 − z ) Al z ] O 2 was studied by accelerating rate calorimetry. Al substitution for Co in Li [ Ni 1 ∕ 3 Mn 1 ∕ 3 Co 1 ∕ 3 ] O 2 caused a dramatic improvement in thermal stability over the material without aluminum. Al-doped Li { Ni 1 ∕ 3 Mn 1 ∕ 3 Co ( 1 ∕ 3 − z ) Al z ] O 2 with z = 0.1 displays an energy density greater than Li Mn 2 O 4 and equivalent or higher thermal stability, making it a possible choice as an electrode material for large Li-ion batteries.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".