Designing a High‐Performance Lithium–Sulfur Batteries Based on Layered Double Hydroxides–Carbon Nanotubes Composite Cathode and a Dual‐Functional Graphene–Polypropylene–Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> Separator
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Designing an optimum cell configuration that can deliver high capacity, fast charge–discharge capability, and good cycle retention is imperative for developing a high‐performance lithium–sulfur battery. Herein, a novel lithium–sulfur cell design is proposed, which consists of sulfur and magnesium–aluminum‐layered double hydroxides (MgAl‐LDH)–carbon nanotubes (CNTs) composite cathode with a modified polymer separator produced by dual side coating approaches (one side: graphene and the other side: aluminum oxides). The composite cathode functions as a combined electrocatalyst and polysulfide scavenger, greatly improving the reaction kinetics and stabilizing the Coulombic efficiency upon cycling. The modified separator enhances further Li + ‐ion or electron transport and prevents undesirable contact between the cathode and dendritic lithium on the anode. The proposed lithium–sulfur cell fabricated with the as‐prepared composite cathode and modified separator exhibits a high initial discharge capacity of 1375 mA h g −1 at 0.1 C rate, excellent cycling stability during 200 cycles at 1 C rate, and superior rate capability up to 5 C rate, even with high sulfur loading of 4.0 mg cm −2 . In addition, the findings that found in postmortem chracterization of cathode, separator, and Li metal anode from cycled cell help in identifying the reason for its subsequent degradation upon cycling in Li–S cells.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it