MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2514437433 · doi:10.1021/acs.chemmater.6b02726

Methods and Protocols for Electrochemical Energy Storage Materials Research

2016· article· en· W2514437433 on OpenAlexafffund
Elahe Talaie, Patrick Bonnick, Xiaoqi Sun, Quanquan Pang, Xiao Liang, Linda F. Nazar

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry of Materials · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWaterloo Institute for Nanotechnology, University of WaterlooBASFNatural Resources CanadaU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsBattery (electricity)Characterization (materials science)Dielectric spectroscopyElectrochemical energy storageElectrochemistryMaterials scienceElectrochemical cellX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyEnergy storageElectrodeComputer scienceNanotechnologyFabricationAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Chemical engineeringChemistrySupercapacitorPhysical chemistryEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an overview of the procedures and methods to prepare and evaluate materials for electrochemical cells in battery research in our laboratory, including cell fabrication, two- and three-electrode cell studies, and methodology for evaluating diffusion coefficients and impedance measurements. Informative characterization techniques employed to assess new materials for batteries are also described, including operando XRD, pair-distribution function analysis, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, and operando X-ray absorption spectroscopy. Examples of insightful information that each technique has provided in the research areas of Li-S, Na-ion, and Mg batteries are presented along with excellent references for detailed descriptions of the theory, experimental procedures, and various designs, as well as methods for data processing and analysis.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.048

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations175
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistry of MaterialsSame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207