MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2393569345 · doi:10.1149/2.0321603jes

Multi-Particle Model for a Commercial Blended Lithium-Ion Electrode

2015· article· en· W2393569345 on OpenAlexaff
Zhiyu Mao, M. Farkhondeh, Mark Pritzker, Michael Fowler, Zhongwei Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLithium (medication)AgglomerateParticle (ecology)ElectrodeMaterials scienceRange (aeronautics)CathodeIonParticle sizeElectrochemistryBattery (electricity)PorosityThermodynamicsChemistryComposite materialPhysicsPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A mathematical model is presented to describe the electrochemical performance of a LiNi 1/3 Mn 1/3 Co 1/3 O 2 −LiMn 2 O 4 (NMC-LMO) blended cathode obtained from a commercial lithium-ion battery. The model accounts for the multiple particle sizes of the active materials in terms of three distributions: one for LMO particles, one for NMC primary and one for NMC secondary particles which likely are agglomerates of primary particles. The good match between the simulated and experimental galvanostatic discharge and differential-capacity curves supports the assumption that the secondary particles are nonporous under conditions where currents of 2C and below are applied. A thermodynamically consistent equation for diffusive flux is used to describe transport across the active particles. The corresponding thermodynamic factors are estimated from the equilibrium potentials of the active materials present in the electrode, while the particle size distribution and effective electronic conductivities of each component have been directly measured. Since the model is able to accurately describe the utilization of the various particle sizes and determine the contribution of each component at different discharge rates, it can serve as a useful tool for customizing the designs and predicting the discharge profiles of electrode blends made up of different active materials having a range of particle sizes.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations41
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Electrochemical SocietySame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207