Stable solvates in solution of lithium bis(trifluoromethylsulfone)imide in glymes and other aprotic solvents: Phase diagrams, crystallography and Raman spectroscopyElectronic supplementary information (ESI) available: Crystallographic data (single crystal data) in cif format (CCDC reference number 184345). See http://www.rsc.org/suppdata/cp/b2/b203776a/
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lithium bis(trifluoromethylsulfone)imide (LiTFSI), a promising electrolyte for high energy lithium batteries, forms several stable solvates having low melting points in aprotic solvents. In a previous study (D. Brouillette, G. Perron and J. E. Desnoyers, J. Solution Chem., 1998, 27, 151), it was suggested, based on thermodynamic studies, that such stable solvates may persist in solution and influence their properties. To verify this hypothesis, phase diagrams and Raman spectra have been measured for solutions of LiTFSI in acetonitrile, propylene carbonate and glymes (n(ethyleneglycol) dimethyl ether or Gn), which have the chemical structure CH3–O–(CH2–CH2–O)n–CH3 for n = 1 to 4 and 10. The relative intensities of the LiTFSI and solvent Raman bands are proportional to the concentration for systems without solvates. The systems for which stable solvates were identified in the phase diagram show important changes in the relative intensities for both the LiTFSI and the solvent Raman bands at concentrations corresponding to particular stoichiometries and support the conclusion that stable solvates are present in the solutions. The structure of the crystalline G1:LiTFSI solvate was determined by X-ray crystallography. Structures for (G2)2:LiTFSI and (G1)3:LiTFSI solvates are proposed.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it