Evaluation on the effect of gadolinium-doping for niobium on the morphology and ionic conductivity of garnet-like Li<sub>5</sub>La<sub>3</sub>Nb<sub>2</sub>O<sub>12</sub>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a great interest in gaining a deeper understanding of the lithium ion conductivity of Li-stuffed garnets that result from the substitution at either the La or M sites in Li5La3M2O12 (M = Nb, Ta), since these materials can be used as potential electrolytes in all solid-state batteries. Here, we investigate the effect of replacing Nb5+ with Gd3+ and stuffing two Li+ per Gd3+ in Li5La3Nb2O12 on the structure and ionic conductivity of the new family of garnet-type compounds with the nominal formula Li5+2xLa3Nb2−xGdxO12 (0 ≤ x ≤ 0.45). The samples were prepared via conventional solid-state synthesis in air at elevated temperatures. Powder X-ray diffraction studies confirmed the formation of the garnet-type structure for Li5+2xLa3Nb2−xGdxO12 (0 ≤ x ≤ 0.45). Elemental mapping obtained using energy dispersive X-ray analysis showed no evidence of a secondary phase being formed in Li5+2xLa3Nb2−xGdxO12 (0 ≤ x ≤ 0.45). Archimedes’ density measurements confirmed that the density of the samples with x ≤ 0.25 is not improved. The porosity of the samples with x ≥ 0.3 was found to be in the 8%–16% range. Among the samples investigated in this work, the x = 0.45 member of Li5+2xLa3Nb2−xGdxO12 showed the highest ionic conductivity of 1.91 × 10−5 S cm−1 at room temperature, which is an order of magnitude higher than that of the parent compound Li5La3Nb2O12. The activation energy of this material was calculated to be 0.38 eV at 25–225 °C and 0.28 eV at 225–325 °C. The change in the activation energy at the high temperature regime can be explained using the Li site occupation model in the garnet-type structure.
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".