MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2427704813

Parametric analysis using impedance spectroscopy: relationship between material properties and battery performance

2000· article· en· W2427704813 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Evgenij Barsoukov, J H Kim, D H Kim, Kyo Seon Hwang, C.O. Yoon, H Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of New Materials for Electrochemical Systems · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParametrization (atmospheric modeling)Electrical impedanceBattery (electricity)Parametric statisticsMaterials scienceEquivalent circuitDielectric spectroscopyElectrodeCathodeVoltageComposite numberAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Composite materialThermodynamicsChemistryElectrical engineeringPhysicsMathematicsEngineeringOpticsPower (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The feasibility of predicting battery material performance based on parametrization of impedance spectra measured at different states of charge in boundaries of non-linear equivalent circuit model is demonstrated. All kinetically relevant parameters of LiCoO{sub 2}-based composite lithium ion battery cathode materials were obtained by an impedance parametrization procedure developed in the Kumho Chemical Laboratories in Korea. Accuracy of performance prediction was tested by comparing voltage profiles, calculated on the basis of numerical image, at discharge rates ranging from 1/10a to 3C with experimental data. The relative influence of kinetic steps on discharge behaviour of composite electrode were compared to model parameters. Thickness dependence predicted by the model was found to be correct when compared to experimental impedance spectra of samples with different thicknesses. It was concluded that multi-dimensional impedance parametrization showed good potential for use in battery material standardization and performance evaluation, as well as in optimizing material composites for specific applications. 14 refs., 10 figs.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations18
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of New Materials for Electrochemical SystemsSame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207