Single-Phase Layered Compositions in the Li-Mn-Ni-O System Which Do Not Significantly Oxidize Electrolyte at 4.6 V Versus Li/Li<sup>+</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Detailed phase diagrams of the Li-Mn-Ni-O system have been determined to provide a broader understanding of how synthesis conditions affect the phase composition of Li-Mn-Ni-O positive electrode materials.1,2 Figure 1 shows the positive electrode region of the Li-Mn-Ni-O pseudoternary phase diagram for samples quenched from 900oC. The phase diagram is labeled with various individual compositions, single-phase regions, tie-lines, and multi-phase co-existence regions all elucidated through extensive crystallographic analysis,3 introducing many opportunities for characterization of new positive electrode materials. In order to develop Li-ion batteries with high energy densities and long cycle lives, ideal novel materials would not react with carbonate-based electrolytes at high potentials (≥ 4.6 V vs. Li/Li+). In this study, three single-phase layered compositions in the Li-Mn-Ni-O system, labeled as A, B and C in Figure 1, were studied by ICP-OES, XRD, and ultra high precision coulometry (UHPC), a technique which uses precise measurement of coulombic efficiency (CE) and charge endpoint capacity slippage to detect electrolyte oxidation. Sample A was determined to be Li[Li0.157Ni0.122Mn0.650□0.071]O2, a Li-deficient, Mn-rich material containing 3.5% metal site vacancies.4 Sample B was Li[Li0.117Ni0.325Mn0.558]O2, an essentially Ni-rich member of the Li-rich oxide solid solution series (dashed orange line in Figure 1), while sample C was determined to be Li[Li0.148Ni0.480Mn0.471]O2, an approximate Li-rich analogue of Li[Ni0.5Mn0.5]O2. Figure 2 shows the CE, discharge capacity, and normalized charge endpoint capacity for cycle 10 onwards for samples A, B, and C cycled to 4.6 V and 4.8 V, and for Li[Ni1/3Mn1/3Co1/3]O2 cycled to 4.2 V, 4.4 V, and 4.6 V. In general, cycling to 4.6 V yielded better CE and lower slippage of the Li-Mn-Ni-O materials compared to cycling to 4.8 V, which produced more slippage due to electrolyte oxidation. The performance of the Li-deficient Li[Li0.157Ni0.122Mn0.650□0.071]O2 material cycled to 4.6 V was striking, as it maintained a substantially higher CE and a lower charge endpoint capacity slippage per cycle than Li[Li0.117Ni0.325Mn0.558]O2, Li[Li0.148Ni0.480Mn0.471]O2, and industry standard Li[Ni1/3Mn1/3Co1/3]O2 (cycled to only 4.2 V) while maintaining a reversible capacity of 225 mAh/g after 50 cycles. These results highlight the inherent “inertness” of Li[Li0.157Ni0.122Mn0.650□0.071]O2 and its suitability as a thin protective shell in a core-shell particle configuration. References 1. E. McCalla, A. W. Rowe, R. Shunmugasundaram, and J. R. Dahn, Chem. Mater., 25, 989–999 (2013). 2. E. McCalla, A. W. Rowe, C. R. Brown, L. R. P. Hacquebard, and J. R. Dahn, J. Electrochem. Soc., 160, A1134–A1138 (2013). 3. E. McCalla and J. R. Dahn, Solid State Ion., 242, 1–9 (2013). 4. E. McCalla, A. W. Rowe, J. Camardese, and J. R. Dahn, Chem. Mater., 25, 2716–2721 (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 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".