MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2255752103 · doi:10.1149/ma2014-04/1/117

Invited Presentation: Polymers, Still Solid after 30 Years

2014· article· en· W2255752103 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michel Armand

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Materials and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrolyteLithium (medication)ElectrochemistryMaterials scienceCathodeChemistryElectrodeChemical engineeringPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The 70’s have seen the generalization of the concept of electrochemical intercalation, leading in principle to immortal electrodes. The lithium-ion battery had later an early demonstration [1], but gained acceptance after the dangerous failures of lithium–metal batteries using liquid electrolytes had become a liability. The shortcomings of the Li-ion are, in terms of energy density, the weight devoted to the negative electrode is accentuated by the necessity of a copper current collector.. Two strategies are presently followed: i) the use of high voltage positives (LiNi0.5Mn1.5O2, “lithium-rich”) though no electrolyte seems still satisfactory to span a 5 V stability window especially at T > 40°C; ii) the re-emergence of the Li° electrode. I The 70’s saw also the emergence of the polymer electrolytes, after Wright [2] found appreciable conductivity in PEO-NaI adducts, conditional to heating to ≥ 60°C. After the polyethers complexing ability was extended to lithium salts, the field became very active and showing much ingenuity. However the main effort towards scaling-up to practical batteries was sustained by Hydro-Québec from 1978 to 2000 totalling close to one billion $. Polymer electrolytes: The carbon-carbon-oxygen sequence in polyethers corresponds to the optimal spacing to allow wrapping of the backbone around the cations. However, in practice, even the first homologue, with a CH3 (PO) side group introduces already some steric hindrance with much decreased cation sheathing ability. Defects like PO units or keeping through the design of the polymer architecture a Mw of the sequential PEO segments < 600 resolve the problem of crystallinity of the homopolymer and its stoichiometric complexes. The inclusion of nanoparticles (SiO2, Al2O3, BaTiO3…) increases the amorphous domains and had been widely used to create polymer electrolyte from commercial PEO without resorting to complex macromolecular synthesis. The next problem is the exponential decrease of the conductivity starting from the glass transition temperature, which it has not been possible to bring lower than ≈ -60 °C, resulting in practice to an operating temperature close to + 60 °C. The only practical way to lower Tg, i.e. reduce the volumetric density of chemical bonds is to add plasticizers, including ionic liquids, the drawback being then the risk of chemical cross-talk between the electrodes, as in liquid electrolytes. The callenge of breaking the Tg barrier in a mostly organic based matrix, has yet to be solved. Though, the Li° batteries operating with polymer electrolytes are relatively long-lived with minor dendrite problems. There is now an emphasis on unipolar conductivity polymers, to totally suppress the source of dendrites, the salt depletion at the Li° electrode during charging. This is obtained by including the anion is a backbone, either copolymerized [3] or separated [4] from the solvating chain. Another options are the surface coating of nano-particles with the salt [5] or in block polymers [6]. There is now convincing evidence that the lithium-metal electrode can function safely, the only restriction being the acceptability, for polymer electrolytes, of a “warm” battery (EVs, busses). References [1] Lazzari, M & Scrosati B, J. Electrochem. Soc, 127, 773, (1980). [2] Wright P.V. Br. Polym. J.,7,319-327 (1975). [3] Feng et al., Electrochimica Acta, 93, 254-263, (2013) [4] Meziane et al. Electrochimica Acta, 57, 14-19, (2011). [5] Villaluenga et al.,J. Mater. Chem. A, 1, 8348, (2013). [6] Bouchet et al., Nature Materials 12, 452–457 (2013)

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)0.003
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1480.082

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.216 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicAdvanced Battery Materials and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207