MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058611436 · doi:10.1021/cm1017163

Synthesis, Characterization, and Thermal Stability of Li[Ni<sub>1/3</sub>Mn<sub>1/3</sub>Co<sub>1/3−<i>z</i></sub>(MnMg)<sub><i>z</i>/2</sub>]O<sub>2</sub>

2010· article· en· W2058611436 on OpenAlexaff
Wenbin Luo, Xinhai Li, J. R. Dahn

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry of Materials · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermal stabilityAnalytical Chemistry (journal)HydroxideRietveld refinementElectrochemistryCalorimetryMetalMaterials scienceTransition metalCrystallographyElectrolyteNuclear chemistryChemistryCrystal structurePhysical chemistryInorganic chemistryPhysicsMetallurgyElectrode

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

LiNi 1/3 Mn 1/3 Co 1/3− z (MnMg) z /2 O 2 (0 ≤ z ≤ 1/3) samples were prepared from hydroxide precursors. The hydroxide precursors were heated with Li 2 CO 3 at 900 °C for 3 h to prepare the oxides. The XRD results show single phase LiNi 1/3 Mn 1/3 Co 1/3− z (MnMg) z /2 O 2 samples can be prepared for 0 ≤ z ≤ 1/3. Rietveld refinements of XRD data show that when Mn and Mg substitute for Co in NMC there is an increase in the amount of transition metal in the Li layer. Electrochemical studies of the LiNi 1/3 Mn 1/3 Co 1/3− z (MnMg) z /2 O 2 (0≤ z ≤ 1/3) samples were used to measure the rate of capacity reduction with z, found to be about −250 (mAh/g)/( z = 1) charging to 4.3 V and −150 (mA h/g)/( z = 1) charging to 4.6 V. The impact of Mn and Mg cosubstitution on the thermal stability of charged LiNi 1/3 Mn 1/3 Co 1/3− z (MnMg) z /2 O 2 (0 ≤ z ≤ 1/3) samples in electrolyte was studied using accelerating rate calorimetry. The thermal stability of LiNi 1/3 Mn 1/3 Co 1/3− z (MnMg) z /2 O 2 is independent of z for the samples studied.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.196 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations72
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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