MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2464945740 · doi:10.1021/acscombsci.5b00048

Combinatorial Study of the Li–Ni–Mn–Co Oxide Pseudoquaternary System for Use in Li–Ion Battery Materials Research

2015· article· en· W2464945740 on OpenAlexaff
Colby Brown, Eric McCalla, Cody W Watson, J. R. Dahn

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Combinatorial Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattery (electricity)SpinelChemistryPhase (matter)OxideCobalt oxideLithium (medication)IonElectrodeCobaltNanotechnologyInorganic chemistryMaterials sciencePhysical chemistryMetallurgyThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Combinatorial synthesis has proven extremely effective in screening for new battery materials for Li-ion battery electrodes. Here, a study in the Li-Ni-Mn-Co-O system is presented, wherein samples with nearly 800 distinct compositions were prepared using a combinatorial and high-throughput method to screen for single-phase materials of high interest as next generation positive electrode materials. X-ray diffraction is used to determine the crystal structure of each sample. The Gibbs' pyramid representing the pseudoquaternary system was studied by making samples within three distinct pseudoternary planes defined at fractional cobalt metal contents of 10%, 20%, and 30% within the Li-Ni-Mn-Co-O system. Two large single-phase regions were observed in the system: the layered region (ordered rocksalt) and cubic spinel region; both of which are of interest for next-generation positive electrodes in lithium-ion batteries. These regions were each found to stretch over a wide range of compositions within the Li-Ni-Mn-Co-O pseudoquaternary system and had complex coexistence regions existing between them. The sample cooling rate was found to have a significant effect on the position of the phase boundaries of the single-phase regions. The results of this work are intended to guide further research by narrowing the composition ranges worthy of study and to illustrate the broad range of applications where solution-based combinatorial synthesis can have significant impact.

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations46
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Combinatorial ScienceSame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207