The Solid-Electrolyte Interphase Formation Reactions of Ethylene Sulfate and Its Synergistic Chemistry with Prop-1-ene-1,3-Sultone in Lithium-Ion Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electrolyte additives are a promising route to stable solution chemistries needed for improved and next-generation lithium-ion cells. Yet the underlying chemistry remains unknown for most additives and additive blends in use. This work presents possible reaction pathways for solid-electrolyte interphase formation in lithium-ion cells from ethylene sulfate (DTD), prop-1-ene-1,3-sultone (PES) and the binary PES/DTD blend. Pathways are supported by theoretical calculations (density functional theory) and experimental results (electrochemistry, gas chromatography thermal conductivity detection, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, isothermal microcalorimetry). A hypothesis to understand the synergistic chemistry of the blend is proposed: Reduction of PES, the 'primary additive', at the negative electrode forms a nucleophile that reacts with electrophilic DTD, the 'secondary additive', to produce a passive solid-electrolyte interphase that inhibits direct reduction of DTD or the solvent. The results are further discussed in the contexts of future mechanistic studies, computational additive discovery, and the development of improved lithium-ion cell chemistries.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".