MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2275594466 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.5b12142

NMR Determination of the Relative Binding Affinity of Crown Ethers for Manganese Cations in Aprotic Nonaqueous Lithium Electrolyte Solutions

2016· article· en· W2275594466 on OpenAlexafffund
Allen D. Pauric, Susi Jin, Timothy Fuller, Michael P. Balogh, Ion C. Halalay, Gillian R. Goward

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryManganeseChelationLithium (medication)Crown etherElectrochemistryInorganic chemistryTitrationEtherElectrolyteCombinatorial chemistryElectrodeIonOrganic chemistryPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polymeric chelating agents placed in the interelectrode space of a Li-ion battery (LIB) have been suggested as a means of sequestering Mn cations dissolved from positive electrodes of LIBs to prevent their migration to, and deposition onto, negative electrodes and thus mitigate the associated degradation of LIB performance and life. In order to select the most effective chelating agent and optimize its polymeric form, it is desirable to determine the binding affinity of various chelating agents for manganese cations. The present study evaluates the relative binding affinity of crown ethers for manganese cations in a lithium-containing environment through the detection of the 7 Li nucleus chemical shift. Results are presented for the relative binding affinities of 15-crown-5 and 1-aza-15-crown-5 ethers for Mn 2+ and Mn 3+ . Significant differences in relative binding affinity were discovered with particular crown ether–manganese oxidation state combinations. Additionally, a substantial decrease in binding affinity was observed for the polymeric crown ether relative to its molecular form. These results indicate that the NMR titration technique is a useful screening tool, which will inform and assist the development of more effective manganese cations trapping materials. Quantification of the Mn trapping efficiency will permit the screening of trapping groups at the molecular level (before attachment to a polymer), as well optimization of their polymeric forms (type of backbone, morphology, length of linker, amount of cross-linking, etc.). The methodology developed in the present work will therefore accelerate the development of the Mn trapping 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 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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C→Same topicAdvancements in Battery Materials→French-language works237,207→