MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016835866 · doi:10.1021/cm000359m

Superlattice Ordering of Mn, Ni, and Co in Layered Alkali Transition Metal Oxides with P2, P3, and O3 Structures

2000· article· en· W2016835866 on OpenAlexafffund
Zhonghua Lu, R. A. Donaberger, J. R. Dahn

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry of Materials · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsSteacie Institute for Molecular SciencesDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSuperlatticeTransition metalMaterials scienceCrystallographyStackingMetalInorganic chemistryPhase (matter)ChemistryCatalysisOrganic chemistryMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Na 2/3 Ni 1/3 Mn 2/3 O 2 adopts a layered structure (P2) where the Ni and Mn cations form an ordered arrangement with a √3a × √3a superlattice. The ordered superlattice is preserved in T2-structure Li 2/3 Ni 1/3 Mn 2/3 O 2 prepared from the Na-containing parent phase by ion exchange. In attempts to improve the electrochemical properties of Li 2/3 Ni 1/3 Mn 2/3 O 2, we have investigated the effect of Co substitution for Ni in the parent phase. Using X-ray and neutron diffraction, it is shown that increasing amounts of Co first weaken and then suppress the superlattice ordering in the transition metal layers. For x ≤ 1/12 in Na 2/3 [Co x Ni 1/3 - x Mn 2/3 ]O 2 the superlattice persists, but for x ≥ 1/6 the superlattice is not observed. During ion exchange to make lithium-containing materials, only samples with well-developed superlattices result in crystalline products; otherwise, a stacking-faulted O2-type structure is obtained. The ordering of transition metals in transition metal layers was also found in P3−Na 2/3 [Ni 1/3 Mn 2/3 ]O 2 and O3−Li 2/3 [Ni 1/3 Mn 2/3 ]O 2, but not in O3−Na[Ni 1/2 Mn 1/2 ]O 2 . The necessary conditions for superlattice ordering of transition metal atoms in the transition metal layers are discussed.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations160
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistry of MaterialsSame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207