Effects of Succinonitrile (SN) as an Electrolyte Additive on the Impedance of LiCoO<sub>2</sub>/Graphite Pouch Cells during Cycling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
LiCoO 2 /graphite pouch cells with 1.0M LiPF 6 in EC:DEC (1:2 v/v) electrolyte were used to study the effect of succinonitrile (SN) as an electrolyte additive on the cell impedance during cycling. Pouch cells containing no additives, 2 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC), 2 wt% SN and 2 wt% VC + 2 wt% SN were studied for comparison. In order to investigate which electrode contributed to impedance changes during charge and discharge cycling, positive and negative electrode symmetric cells, fabricated using electrodes extracted from the parent pouch cells, were studied using electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS). Two wt% VC added to the electrolyte suppressed impedance growth of the positive electrode during cycling, while the addition of 2 wt% SN greatly increased the impedance growth of the positive electrode during cycling. The addition of both 2 wt% VC and 2 wt% SN leads to intermediate behavior. In all cases, the negative electrode impedance decreased during cycling when VC, SN or VC+SN additives were present. The dominant contribution to the impedance growth of pouch cells containing SN during cycling comes from the positive 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".