Storage Studies on Li/Graphite Cells and the Impact of So-Called SEI-Forming Electrolyte Additives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The growth of the solid electrolyte interphase on graphite electrodes during storage at different temperatures was studied using the High Precision Automated Storage System at Dalhousie University. The Li/graphite cells were precycled at 30°C before storage. The open circuit potential was automatically measured every six hours during storage and the capacity before and after storage was measured with high accuracy. The mechanism responsible for the capacity loss during storage is the growth and reformation of solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) on the graphite surface. The experimental results show that the addition of the electrolyte additives vinylene carbonate (VC) and fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) increase the capacity loss during storage compared to the control electrolyte at 30, 40, 50 and 60°C. A beneficial effect of VC was not even observed at 60°C and cells with the FEC electrolyte additive showed substantially higher capacity loss at 60°C than control cells. Storage experiments on negative electrodes can lead to a better understanding of the solid electrolyte interphase and also can be used to screen for better SEI-forming electrolyte additives.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".