MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2175539453 · doi:10.1038/ncomms9597

Evidence of covalent synergy in silicon–sulfur–graphene yielding highly efficient and long-life lithium-ion batteries

2015· article· en· W2175539453 on OpenAlexafffund
Fathy M. Hassan, Rasim Batmaz, Jingde Li, Xiaolei Wang, Xingcheng Xiao, Aiping Yu, Zhongwei Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster UniversityU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsGrapheneMaterials scienceFaraday efficiencyElectrolyteLithium (medication)SiliconAnodePolyacrylonitrileBattery (electricity)ElectrodeNanotechnologyNanoparticleChemical engineeringChemistryOptoelectronicsPolymerPower (physics)Composite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Silicon has the potential to revolutionize the energy storage capacities of lithium-ion batteries to meet the ever increasing power demands of next generation technologies. To avoid the operational stability problems of silicon-based anodes, we propose synergistic physicochemical alteration of electrode structures during their design. This capitalizes on covalent interaction of Si nanoparticles with sulfur-doped graphene and with cyclized polyacrylonitrile to provide a robust nanoarchitecture. This hierarchical structure stabilized the solid electrolyte interphase leading to superior reversible capacity of over 1,000 mAh g(-1) for 2,275 cycles at 2 A g(-1). Furthermore, the nanoarchitectured design lowered the contact of the electrolyte to the electrode leading to not only high coulombic efficiency of 99.9% but also maintaining high stability even with high electrode loading associated with 3.4 mAh cm(-2). The excellent performance combined with the simplistic, scalable and non-hazardous approach render the process as a very promising candidate for Li-ion battery technology.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations203
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207