Improving the High Voltage Cycling of Li[Ni<sub>0.42</sub>Mn<sub>0.42</sub>Co<sub>0.16</sub>]O<sub>2</sub>(NMC442)/Graphite Pouch Cells Using Electrolyte Additives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Li[Ni 0.42 Mn 0.42 Co 0.16 ]O 2 (NMC442)/graphite pouch cells with 1 M LiPF 6 in ethylene carbonate (EC): ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC) (3:7 by weight) electrolyte containing 2 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC), 2 wt% prop-1-ene-1,3 sultone (PES), or 2 wt% PES + 1 wt% tris(trimethylsilyl) phosphite (TTSPi) + 1 wt% methylene methanedisulfonate (MMDS) ("PES-211") were subjected to cycling tests at various upper cut-off voltages from 4.2 to 4.7 V. After every 10 cycles, the pouch cells were charged or discharged to 3.8 V and evaluated using electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS). This approach allows the impact of electrolyte additives on the impedance of cells cycled to different cut-off voltages to be studied systematically. The addition of 2% PES or "PES-211" proved to be beneficial in suppressing impedance growth when cells are cycled up to and above 4.4 V. Long-term cycling tests between 3.0 V and 4.4 V at 45°C showed that "PES-211" had the best capacity retention (∼85%) and the least impedance growth after 500 cycles. The results suggest the use of "PES-211" could lead to longer lived and higher power NMC/graphite Li-ion cells with better tolerance to high voltage (4.4 V) which will improve energy density.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".