MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2307529912 · doi:10.1149/ma2015-02/3/289

A Simple Composite Protective Layer Coating That Enhances the Cycling Stability of Lithium Metal Batteries

2015· article· en· W2307529912 on OpenAlexaff
Hongkyung Lee, Jongchan Song, Yun‐Jung Kim, Hyungjun Noh, Jin Hong Lee, Jung-Ki Park, Hee‐Tak Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnodeMaterials scienceElectrolyteElectrodeLithium (medication)Composite numberLayer (electronics)CoatingGraphiteChemical engineeringTinStripping (fiber)ElectrochemistryComposite materialNanotechnologyMetallurgyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metallic lithium is the most promising negative electrode for high-energy rechargeable batteries due to its extremely high specific capacity and its extremely low redox potential. However, the low cycle efficiency and lithium dendrite formation during the charge/discharge processes consistently hinder its practical application. In this report, we present a stabilized Li electrode on which a Li + ion conductive inorganic/organic composite protective layer (CPL) is coated. With the introduction of the CPL, the Li dendrite growth and electrolyte decomposition are effectively suppressed; consequently, stable Li plating/stripping at high current densities up to 10 mA cm -2 is possible. Nanoindentation tests demonstrate that the shear modulus of the CPL at narrow indentations is 1.8 times higher than that of the Li metal, which provides a theoretical understanding for its efficacy. Moreover, the LiCoO 2 /Li cell incorporating CPL exhibits excellent cycling stability up to 400 cycles at 1 mA cm -2 (1 C-rate), which demonstrates practical applicability in Li ion batteries through replacing the graphite anode with a CPL-coated Li metal anode.

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207