Comparison of Thermal Stability Between Lithiated Sn[sub 30]Co[sub 30]C[sub 40], LiSi, or Li[sub 0.81]C[sub 6] and 1 M LiPF[sub 6] EC:DEC Electrolyte at High Temperature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reactions between lithiated , LiSi, or and ethylene carbonate: diethyl carbonate (EC:DEC) electrolyte were compared using accelerating rate calorimetry (ARC). Both lithiated and LiSi showed less reactivity than over the entire ARC test temperature range. For both lithiated and LiSi, the self-heating rates were very similar in the low-temperature range (below ). However, lithiated was less reactive than LiSi at higher temperatures primarily because the formed Si reacted with the electrolyte itself, while the formed Sn–Co–C nanocomposite apparently does not. The attractive thermal stability of lithiated suggests that it could be a good alternative to currently used carbonaceous negative electrode materials for lithium-ion batteries where increased safety is desired.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".