Synthesis of Grain‐like MoS<sub>2</sub> for High‐Performance Sodium‐Ion Batteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract MoS 2 is a promising anode material for sodium‐ion batteries (SIBs) due to its attractive theoretical capacity and low cost. MoS 2 generally presents a sheet‐like structure based on its (002) lattice plane; however, such a structure tends to result in agglomeration and stacking of the sheets that cannot accommodate volume expansion, resulting in poor cyclability. Herein, grain‐like MoS 2 particulates (G‐MoS 2 ) are synthesized by sulfiding MoO 3 in highly concentrated sulfur vapor, which results in epitaxial growth of MoS 2 in (002), (100), and (110) lattice planes, with the product consisting of MoS 2 particulates of about 300 nm coated with few‐layered MoS 2 nanosheets. The unique G‐MoS 2 architecture ensures good dispersion and sufficient distance to accommodate volume expansion during sodiation/desodiation, which effectively prevents stacking of MoS 2 , maintaining structural stability. When employed as the working electrode for SIB, G‐MoS 2 delivers a high reversible capacity of 324 mAh g −1 at 0.5 A g −1 , retaining 312 mAh g −1 over 300 cycles with an average coulombic efficiency of 99.8 %. Even when G‐MoS 2 is cycled at a high current density (2.0 A g −1 ), the retained capacity is 175 mAh g −1 after 400 cycles. Comparison with literature reveals that these capacities are among the more promising reversible values reported for pure MoS 2 .
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".