MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2267083366 · doi:10.1149/ma2015-01/1/101

Development of Garnet-Type Li Ion Electrolytes for All-Solid-State Li Ion Batteries

2015· article· en· W2267083366 on OpenAlexaff
Sumaletha Narayanan, Venkataraman Thangadurai, Xia Tong, Gregory T. Hitz, Eric D. Wachsman

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Materials and Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIonic conductivityConductivityElectrolyteFast ion conductorIonMaterials scienceElectrochemical windowElectrochemistryIonic bondingAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Inorganic chemistryChemistryElectrodePhysical chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The high energy density Li ion batteries require a replacement of currently used organic polymer electrolyte with highly conducting solid-state materials in terms of safety reasons. Solid electrolytes exhibiting high total Li ion conductivity, negligible electronic conductivity and wide electrochemical window (up to 6 V/Li/Li+) are preferable for application in solid-state Li ion batteries [1,2]. Garnet-like oxides, with general formula, Li5La3M2O12 (M = Nb, Ta) are emerged as a promising class of Li+ conductors among several other solid-state materials [1]. The increase in Li content has proven to be increasing the Li ion conductivity of garnets and Li7La3Zr2O12 have a highest conductivity of the order of 10-4 Scm-1 at ambient condition [3]. In this talk, we report the effect of excess Li added during synthesis to avoid Li volatilization on the ionic conductivity of garnet-type materials and discuss the recent developments on optimization of ionic conductivity of garnets. References 1. V. Thangadurai, H. Kaack and W. J. F. Weppner, J. Am. Ceram. Soc., 86, 437 (2003). 2. J. B. Goodenough and K.-S. Park, J. Amer. Chem. Soc., 135, 1167 (2013). 3. R. Murugan, V. Thangadurai and W. Weppner, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl., 46, 7778 (2007).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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