MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2513126045 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpclett.6b01368

<i>Operando</i> Nanobeam Diffraction to Follow the Decomposition of Individual Li<sub>2</sub>O<sub>2</sub> Grains in a Nonaqueous Li–O<sub>2</sub> Battery

2016· article· en· W2513126045 on OpenAlexaff
Swapna Ganapathy, Jouke R. Heringa, Maria S. Anastasaki, Brian D. Adams, Martijn van Hulzen, Shibabrata Basak, Zhaolong Li, Jonathan P. Wright, Linda F. Nazar, N.H. van Dijk, Marnix Wagemaker

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersEuropean Research CouncilNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsDecompositionDiffractionMaterials scienceX-ray crystallographyBattery (electricity)CrystallographyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryPhysicsOpticsThermodynamicsPower (physics)Organic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intense interest in the Li-O2 battery system over the past 5 years has led to a much better understanding of the various chemical processes involved in the functioning of this battery system. However, detailed decomposition of the nanostructured Li2O2 product, held at least partially responsible for the limited reversibility and poor rate performance, is hard to measure operando under realistic electrochemical conditions. Here, we report operando nanobeam X-ray diffraction experiments that enable monitoring of the decomposition of individual Li2O2 grains in a working Li-O2 battery. Platelet-shaped crystallites with aspect ratios between 2.2 and 5.5 decompose preferentially via the more reactive (001) facets. The slow and concurrent decomposition of individual Li2O2 crystallites indicates that the Li2O2 decomposition rate limits the charge time of these Li-O2 batteries, highlighting the importance of using redox mediators in solution to charge Li-O2 batteries.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry LettersSame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207