ARC Study of LiFePO<sub>4</sub>with Different Morphologies Prepared via Three Synthetic Routes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report on the thermal stability of lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO 4 ) cathode material as investigated by accelerating rate calorimetry (ARC). LiFePO 4 (LFP) was prepared using three different synthetic methods, namely, solid state (P1), hydrothermal (P2) and molten state (P3) and have different particle sizes (in the range of ∼100 nm–3 μm) and different surface areas (in the range of ∼6–14 m 2 g −1 ). The thermal stability was evaluated, prior and after charging LiFePO 4 , in the presence of either carbonate solvents (ethylene carbonate (EC): diethyl carbonate (DEC) (1:2 v/v)) or electrolyte (1 M LiPF 6 in the same solvent). In the presence of the electrolyte, LiFePO 4 is shown to be stable up to 280°C or 220°C for uncharged or charged cathode materials, respectively. The surface area of LiFePO 4 is found to affect the initial self-heating rate (SHR) of the charged materials reaction with the electrolyte, while the presence of the LiPF 6 salt reduces significantly the SHR of the combustion reaction of carbonates solvent initiated by the oxygen released from the cathodes; forming Fe 2 P 2 O 7 at elevated temperatures.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".