Synthesis of Single Crystal LiNi<sub>0.88</sub>Co<sub>0.09</sub>Al<sub>0.03</sub>O<sub>2</sub> with a Two-Step Lithiation Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Single crystal positive electrode materials for lithium-ion batteries have superior properties compared to their polycrystalline counterparts as has been demonstrated by industry and academia. Single crystal LiNi 0.5 Mn 0.3 Co 0.2 O 2 (NMC532), NMC622 and now NMC811 have been successfully commercialized. However, single crystal LiNi 1-x-y Co x Al y O 2 (NCA) materials have not been reported yet. One simple method for producing single crystal NMC material requiring high temperature and excess lithium during synthesis creates Li 5 AlO 4 impurities if applied directly in attempts to synthesize single crystal NCA materials. This work introduces a two-step lithiation method for single crystal LiNi 0.88 Co 0.09 Al 0.03 O 2 synthesis, which can prevent the formation of Li 5 AlO 4 impurities. Powder X-ray diffraction, electron backscatter diffraction, and electrochemical measurements show the viability of the two-step lithiation method. Full coin cell cycling shows that the capacity retention of the single crystal NCA samples is at least as good as their polycrystalline counterparts. It is believed that this two-step lithiation method can be used for the synthesis of single crystal NCA and other single crystal Al-containing positive electrode materials. We believe this can lead to longer lived Li-ion cells with Ni-rich positive electrode materials.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".