MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2508532539 · doi:10.1149/ma2016-02/2/158

(Invited) Tribute to Prof. Zempachi Ogumi : In Operando Studies and in Situ Techniques for Li-Ion and Lithium Metal Polymer Batteries

2016· article· en· W2508532539 on OpenAlexaff
Karim Zaghib, Hugues Marceau, Pierre Hovington, Zhongsheng Wen, C Kim, Michel L. Trudeau, R. Veillette, Dharminder Laul, Andrea Paolella, Marin Lagacé, Mohamed Chaker, Ashok K. Vijh, Abdelbast Guerfi, A. Mauger, C. Julien, Michel Armand

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsHydro-Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceElectrolyteHighly oriented pyrolytic graphiteLithium (medication)Raman spectroscopyGraphiteDimethoxyethaneChemical engineeringPolysulfideAnodeChemistryElectrodeComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prof. Ogumi is one the leading pioneers of lithium-ion technology in Japan and worldwide. His research studies on battery materials include LiCoO 2 , graphite, and highly oriented pyrolytic graphite (HOPG), Much of his research involved in situ techniques that utilized X-ray, Raman spectroscopy and atomic force spectroscopy (AFM) to investigate the SEI (passivation layer) and lithium intercalation in graphite and HOPG in propylene carbonate (PC)- and ethylene carbonate (EC)-based electrolytes. In this presentation, we will show data and video movies that were obtained during studies of lithium-ion and solid-state batteries using various In operando studies and in situ techniques involving scanning electron microscopy (SEM), transmission electron microscopy (TEM), Raman spectroscopy, X-ray diffraction and ultraviolet-visible absorption spectroscopy (UV-vis). These in situ studies are helpful to understand the mechanisms for volume expansion of anodes consisting of lithium metal (20 %), graphite (10 %) and LTO (0 %). Another example that will be discussed is the dimensional changes of the anode, cathode and electrolyte that occur during charge/discharge. The mechanism of lithium dendrite formation was also studied, and details will be discussed in this presentation. [Don’t know what is meant by Bleand and deleted because I‘m not sure it is needed.] Lithium/solid polymer electrolyte (SPE)/sulfur cells were studied by two in situ techniques: SEM and UV-vis. During the operation of the cell, extensive polysulfide dissolution in the solid polymer electrolyte (cross-linked polyethylene oxide) leads to the formation of a catholyte. A clear micrograph was obtained of the thick passivation layer on the sulfur-rich anode and the decreased SPE thickness during cycling confirmed the failure mechanism; the capacity decays by reducing the amount of active material, which contributes to a charge inhibiting mechanism called polysulfide shuttle. The formation of elemental sulfur is clearly visible in real time during the charge process beyond 2.3 V. The non-destructive UV-vis also shows the characteristic absorption peaks that evolve with cycling, demonstrating the accumulation of various polysulfide species, and the predominant formation of S 4 2- and of S 6 2- during discharge and charge, respectively. This finding implies that the charge and discharge reactions are not completely reversible and proceed along different pathways.

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)0.001
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 score0.659

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207