Study of the mechanical and electrical properties of carbon/poly(vinylidene fluoride–tetrafluoroethylene– propylene) films crosslinked with triethylenetetramine: Possible application as binder for lithium‐ion battery electrodes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The mechanical properties of poly(vinylidene fluoride–tetrafluoroethylene–propylene) (PVDF–TFE–P) were evaluated as a function of the degree of crosslinking. Both bisphenol and triethylenetetramine (TETA) were used as crosslinkers to improve the mechanical properties of PVDF–TFE–P and carbon black–filled PVDF–TFE–P. Bisphenol was incorporated into the polymer by the manufacturer and crosslinking was achieved through additions of MgO and CaO followed by heating. Although bisphenol crosslinking improves the mechanical properties, further crosslinking was needed to obtain good extensibility under repeated deformation of carbon black/PVDF–TFE–P composites. By incorporating small amounts of 1,4‐diazabicyclo[2.2.2]octane and CaO, additions of TETA added more crosslinks in PVDF–TFE–P, leading to improved mechanical and electrical properties. The crosslinked polymer does not become brittle in typical solvents used in lithium battery electrolytes, so we believe that this highly extensible binder system may be useful for electrode materials that show large volume changes during charge–discharge cycling. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 91: 2949–2957, 2004
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".