MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047775723 · doi:10.1149/1.2409862

An In Situ X-Ray Diffraction Study of the Reaction of Li with Crystalline Si

2007· article· en· W2047775723 on OpenAlexafffund
Jing Li, J. R. Dahn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersDalhousie University
KeywordsAmorphous solidMaterials sciencePhase (matter)DiffractionElectrodeElectrochemistryLithium (medication)X-ray crystallographyIn situPhase diagramAtmospheric temperature rangeCrystallographyChemical engineeringAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryPhysical chemistryOpticsThermodynamicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The electrochemical reaction of lithium with a crystalline Si composite electrode at room temperature was investigated using in situ X-ray diffraction (XRD) techniques. The study confirmed that crystalline Si becomes amorphous during the first lithiation. The range of the coexistence region between crystalline Si and amorphous lithiated Si is . The highly lithiated amorphous phase was found to crystallize into rapidly at about (vs ) and this phase exists over a relatively narrow range of capacity. During delithiation, the phase coexists with amorphous with . Once all the phase disappears, the amorphous phase persists as the remaining Li is extracted. The formation of the phase can be avoided if the potential of the Si electrode is controlled above during cycling. Based on the electrochemical and XRD data, a "phase diagram" was constructed to show the phase changes and regions of phase stability that occur during the lithiation and delithiation of the Si electrode.

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)0.000
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.244
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations916
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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