MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2023272153 · doi:10.1139/p10-005

Application of the “confusion principle” to Sn-based materials as negative electrode materials for Li-ion batteries

2010· article· en· W2023272153 on OpenAlexaffvenue
P. Ferguson, J. R. Dahn

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTinAmorphous solidConfusionAlloyIntermetallicElectrodeDiffractionIonAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Carbon fibersMaterials scienceMetallurgyPhysicsCrystallographyComposite materialChemistryComposite numberChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The “confusion principle” (Greer. Nature, 366, 303 (1993)) is applied to tin-3d transition metals carbon alloys to obtain a nanostructured negative electrode material. Various Sn–TMs–C samples with TMs = Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, and Cu (all included with same atomic ratios) were prepared by mechanical milling and by mechanical alloying. Each 10-component alloy sample was examined structurally using X-ray diffraction (XRD) and electrochemically using Li/Sn–TM–C cells. The sample Sn10TMs80C10 showed a nanostructured or amorphous-type XRD pattern, which shows the validity of this principle. XRD patterns of samples prepared with higher Sn atomic content showed crystalline features of Sn-based intermetallics. As expected, a very low specific capacity ( [Formula: see text]100 mAh/g) was observed for the sample Sn10TMs80C10. The sample Sn30TMs30C40 had the highest specific capacity (near 400 mAh/g) of the samples prepared. However, features of Sn aggregation were noticed at cycle number 80 of the latter sample, which are normally detrimental to the capacity retention upon further cycling.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.239
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physics→Same topicAdvancements in Battery Materials→French-language works237,207→