MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2288194443 · doi:10.1149/ma2014-02/5/289

Effect of Metal Composition on the Electrochemical Properties of Lithium-Rich Positive Electrode Materials

2014· article· en· W2288194443 on OpenAlexaff
Ramesh Shunmugasundaram, J. R. Dahn

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrochemistryLithium (medication)Materials scienceElectrodeMetalTransition metalOxideAnodeAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Inorganic chemistryMetallurgyChemistryPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Lithium-rich mixed transition metal (TM) oxide positive electrode materials such as Li[Li0.2Ni0.2Mn0.6]O2 and Li[Li0.2Mn0.54Ni0.13Co0.13]O2 are attractive due to their high reversible capacities. However, they suffer from some problems such as high irreversible capacity loss1, poor rate capability2 and voltage fade3. There is no clear understanding in the literature how the overall metal composition of the Li-rich material affects their electrochemical properties including the above mentioned issues. Hence we embark, in this study, on studying the effect of metal composition on the electrochemical properties of the Li-rich positive electrode materials. Experiment A series of Ni(II)aMn(II)bCo(II)cCO3 precursors where a + b + c = 1 were made with co-precipitation synthesis using a continuously-stirring tank reactor (CSTR). Ni(II)aMn(II)bCo(II)cCO3 precursors were mixed with required amounts of Li2CO3and made into Li-rich positive electrode materials of the desired composition using solid-state synthesis at 900ᵒC in air. All the prepared materials were characterized by X-ray diffraction and their true densities were measured using a helium pycnometer. Coin-type cells were made from the synthesized positive electrode materials and Li metal anodes, which were then electrochemically tested under galvanostatic conditions at constant temperature, and their electrochemical properties were compared. Results and Discussion A Li-rich positive electrode material comprised of Li, Ni2+, Mn4+ and Co3+ can be made from a Ni(II)aMn(II)bCo(II)cCO3 precursor. By knowing the exact composition of Ni(II)aMn(II)bCo(II)cCO3 precursor, the theoretical formula of a Li-rich material can be calculated. For example, the Ni0.25Mn0.75 composition can be used to make Li1.2Ni0.2Mn0.6O2. Thus, the Ni-Mn-Co compositions that can be used to make all the possible Li-rich positive electrode materials were determined. Details results showing how the electrochemical behavior varies with overall metal composition will be presented. References 1. J. H. Kim, C. W. Park, and Y. K. Sun, Solid State Ionics, 164, 43 (2003). 2. B. Xu , C. R. Fell , M. Chi , Y. S. Meng, Energy Environ. Sci.2011, 4 , 2223 3. Debasish Mohanty, Athena S. Sefat, Jianlin Li, Roberta A. Meisner, Adam J. Rondinone, E. Andrew Payzant, Daniel P. Abraham, David L. Wood, Claus Daniel, Phys.Chem.Chem.Phys., 2013, 15, 19496--19509

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207