MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021526920 · doi:10.1149/2.029211jes

Effect of Calendering LiFePO<sub>4</sub>Electrodes

2012· article· en· W2021526920 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Andrew van Bommel, Ranjith Divigalpitiya

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDalhousie University
KeywordsCalenderingElectrodeMaterials scienceComposite materialContact resistanceDielectric spectroscopyElectrochemistryFOIL methodChemistryLayer (electronics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

LiFePO 4 electrodes, composed of 5% PVDF and 5% carbon, were coated on aluminum foil. The LiFePO 4 electrodes were calendered to 2.5 g cm −3 . A comparison of the electrochemical performance of uncalendered and calendered LiFePO 4 electrodes was made. Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy analysis of LiFePO 4 symmetric cells and analysis of four-point probe resistance measurements showed that calendering of the electrodes resulted in a large decrease in contact resistance at the current collector – electrode interface. Rate capability data of Li/LiFePO 4 coin cells showed that calendered electrodes maintained their capacity better than uncalendered electrodes at high rates. The contact resistance, made up of constriction resistance and film resistance, was analyzed with contact theory for plastic deformation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations84
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Electrochemical SocietySame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207