Advanced Ceramic Li Ion Electrolytes for All-Solid-State Li Ion Batteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At present, the energy supply around the world comes from fossil fuels and is one of the main causes of greenhouse gas emissions. Attempts have been made to generate electricity using renewable sources, such as wind and solar, but it could be realized through the use of reliable electrochemical storage systems. Batteries can be used in combination with renewable energies to store energy when the demand is low and supply to the grid when demand is high. Among the known secondary batteries, Li ion batteries (LIBs) find applications ranging from small mobile electronics to transportation and even to stationary, grid storage systems. LIBs exhibit the highest power and energy densities over other known batteries. The most frequently used cathodes in LIBs include LiCoO2, LiNi1/3Mn2/3Co1/3O12 and LiFePO4 and graphite is the most popular choice for anode. Typical electrolyte used in the LIB consists of lithium salt (e.g., LiPF6, LiBF4 or LiClO4) dissolved in an organic carbonate such as ethylene carbonate, diethyl carbonate or propylene carbonate. The current LIB research is mainly focused on improving the practical gravimetric and volumetric energy densities by developing advanced Li ion electrolytes and electrodes. Attempts have been made to replace unstable polymer members with high temperature stable and highly conducting ceramic Li ion electrolytes, including Li3N, Li-β-alumina, A-site deficient perovskite-type and garnet-type metal oxides. These solid electrolytes offer the advantages of being safe and compatible with advanced electrode materials, as well as a having a wide temperature range of operation and high Li ion conductivity. In this talk, recent advances in most promising garnet-type Li5La3M2O12 (M = Nb,Ta) oxides will be discussed. Since their discovery as Li ion conductors, there has been an increased interest in the development of garnet-type Li ion electrolytes for all solid-state LIBs. Some of the members of the garnet have been proven to be stable against chemical reaction with Li, as well as electrochemically stable up to 6 V vs. Li/Li+. These attributes, together with the good total Li ion conductivity, make them ideal electrolyte candidates for all solid-state LIBs.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.008 |
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".