Electrochemical and In Situ XRD Studies of the Li Reaction with Combinatorially Sputtered Mo[sub 1−x]Sn[sub x] (0 ≤ x ≤ 0.50) Thin Films
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Detailed electrochemical studies of the reaction of Li with combinatorially sputter-deposited BCC and nanocrystalline thin films are reported for In situ X-ray diffraction (XRD) performed for 0.36, 0.44, show no evidence for formation of new phases during the reaction with Li. During charge/discharge cycling, a definite and periodic variation of the BCC (110) Bragg angle for is strong evidence for a topotactic Li insertion mechanism. Sensitive differential capacity vs. measurements on cells with show no new peaks for as many 75 cycles, supporting a topotactic insertion reaction. However, in the higher Sn content films the appearance and growth of new peaks after the first cycle is consistent with the aggregation of Sn clusters and the formation of Li-Sn phases. Inclusion of about 20% oxygen in nanostructured films seems to prevent Sn aggregation and improve the cycling performance markedly. The best materials give specific capacities near 350 mAh/g, have densities near 9 g/cc and cycle well. This could be the first report of true topotactic Li insertion into a metal host. © 2004 The Electrochemical Society. All rights reserved.
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".