MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112614773 · doi:10.1002/adma.201200397

Emerging Applications of Atomic Layer Deposition for Lithium‐Ion Battery Studies

2012· review· en· W2112614773 on OpenAlexaff
Xiangbo Meng, Xiao‐Qing Yang, Xueliang Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Materials · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtomic layer depositionMaterials scienceNanotechnologyElectronicsAnodeBattery (electricity)Lithium (medication)Energy storageNanoarchitectures for lithium-ion batteriesCoatingLayer (electronics)Engineering physicsElectrodeElectrical engineeringPower (physics)EngineeringChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) are used widely in today's consumer electronics and offer great potential for hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), plug-in HEVs, pure EVs, and also in smart grids as future energy-storage devices. However, many challenges must be addressed before these future applications of LIBs are realized, such as the energy and power density of LIBs, their cycle and calendar life, safety characteristics, and costs. Recently, a technique called atomic layer deposition (ALD) attracted great interest as a novel tool and approach for resolving these issues. In this article, recent advances in using ALD for LIB studies are thoroughly reviewed, covering two technical routes: 1) ALD for designing and synthesizing new LIB components, i.e., anodes, cathodes, and solid electrolytes, and; 2) ALD used in modifying electrode properties via surface coating. This review will hopefully stimulate more extensive and insightful studies on using ALD for developing high-performance LIBs.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations563
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced MaterialsSame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207