MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561038027 · doi:10.14447/jnmes.v18i3.358

Effects of Nano Carbon Conductive Additives on the Electrochemical Performance of LiCoO2 Cathode for Lithium Ion Batteries

2015· article· en· W2561038027 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xinlu Li, Xinlin Zhang, Tongtao Li, Qineng Zhong, Yanyan Zhang, Jiamu Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of New Materials for Electrochemical Systems · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceGrapheneCarbon blackTransmission electron microscopyScanning electron microscopeChemical engineeringElectrochemistryLithium (medication)Carbon nanotubeCathodeCarbon fibersElectrical conductorDesorptionAdsorptionComposite numberNanotechnologyElectrodeComposite materialChemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Carbon black(CB), multi-walled carbon nanotubes(CNTs) and graphene nanosheets(GNs) were employed as carbon conductive additives for LiCoO2(LCO). X-ray diffraction, transmission electron microscopy and scanning electron microscopy were used to characterize the crystal structure and morphology of samples. And the specific surface area and porosity structure of the three kinds of carbon conductive additives were measured by N2 adsorption-desorption. To investigate the effect on the electrochemical reaction activity, galvanostatic discharge-charge experiments showed that the composite of LCO-GNs exhibited the highest specific capacity of 167mAh/g at 0.1C and 123 mAh/g at 1 C rate. The flexible wrapping of GNs and bridging nearby LCO particles together were found to enhance electrical conductivity most effectively.

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of New Materials for Electrochemical SystemsSame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207