MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087650991 · doi:10.1039/c3ta12728a

Is Li<sub>4</sub>Ti<sub>5</sub>O<sub>12</sub>a solid-electrolyte-interphase-free electrode material in Li-ion batteries? Reactivity between the Li<sub>4</sub>Ti<sub>5</sub>O<sub>12</sub>electrode and electrolyte

2013· article· en· W2087650991 on OpenAlexaff
Min-Sang Song, Ryoung-Hee Kim, Seung‐Wook Baek, Kug‐Seung Lee, Kyusung Park, Anass Benayad

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Materials Chemistry A · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsSAIT Polytechnic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrolyteElectrodeElectrochemistryLithium (medication)Materials sciencePalladium-hydrogen electrodeCarbon fibersHalf-cellReactivity (psychology)Inorganic chemistryReference electrodeWorking electrodeFast ion conductorInterphaseChemistryChemical engineeringComposite materialPhysical chemistryComposite number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Does the Li4Ti5O12 electrode need a carbon additive in lithium-ion batteries? We answered this question in our previous work by showing that the partially reduced Ti4+ on the surface of Li4Ti5O12 could provide enough electronic conductivity to initiate the electrochemical process. In this work, we discuss the generally accepted fact that a solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) is hardly formed on the surface of the Li4Ti5O12 electrode owing to its high redox potential by using the carbon-free Li4Ti5O12 electrode to exclude the influences of carbon. In contrast to the previous argument, Li4Ti5O12 was found to have certain reactivity towards electrolytes at room and high temperature (60 °C). Moreover, in the presence of carbon in the electrode (i.e. the conventional electrode formulation), the reactivity of the electrode towards an electrolyte was significantly increased at high temperatures. These results were discussed based on surface analyses and electrode morphology observation before and after cycling, and correlated with the electrochemical performance.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.223
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations112
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Materials Chemistry ASame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207