MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001747724 · doi:10.1149/1.3005989

High-Capacity Lithium–Air Cathodes

2008· article· en· W2001747724 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Materials and Technologies
Canadian institutionsTekion (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGravimetric analysisCathodeElectrochemistryLithium (medication)Current densityEnergy densityCarbon fibersCurrent (fluid)Materials scienceCatalysisVoltageChemical engineeringElectrodeChemistryEngineering physicsElectrical engineeringComposite materialPhysicsOrganic chemistryEngineeringPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lithium-oxygen (air) has one of the largest theoretical energy densities of any practical electrochemical couple. This paper will discuss the architecture of an advanced Li-air cathode with an average voltage of 2.33 V and a gravimetric capacity of 5813 mAh/g of carbon. This is the first time such a high capacity has been achieved at a current density of 0.1 mA/cm 2 and without the use of catalysts. Lithium-oxygen (air) has one of the largest theoretical energy densities of any practical electrochemical couple. Based on an inexhaustible and ubiquitous source of oxygen the Li-air couple has a theoretical gravimetric energy density of 13.14 kWh/kg [1]. Figure 1 shows a comparison of common energy storage/conversion technologies based on energy

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.266

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.185 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it