MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2977322870 · doi:10.1039/c9nr02176k

Nanomechanical elasticity and fracture studies of lithium phosphate (LPO) and lithium tantalate (LTO) solid-state electrolytes

2019· article· en· W2977322870 on OpenAlexafffund
Maedeh Amirmaleki, Changhong Cao, Biqiong Wang, Yang Zhao, Teng Cui, Jason Tam, Xueliang Sun, Yu Sun, Tobin Filleter

Bibliographic record

VenueNanoscale · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of TorontoToronto Public Health
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and Science
KeywordsMaterials scienceLithium tantalateElectrolyteNanoscopic scaleSolid-stateLithium (medication)Elasticity (physics)Deflection (physics)Fast ion conductorTantalateNanotechnologyComposite materialChemistryElectrodeFerroelectricityPhysical chemistryOptoelectronicsOpticsLithium niobate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

All-solid-state batteries (ASSBs) have attracted much attention due to their enhanced energy density and safety as compared to traditional liquid-based batteries. However, cyclic performance depreciates due to microcrack formation and propagation at the interface of the solid-state electrolytes (SSEs) and electrodes. Herein, we studied the elastic and fracture behavior of atomic layer deposition (ALD) synthesized glassy lithium phosphate (LPO) and lithium tantalate (LTO) thin films as promising candidates for SSEs. The mechanical behavior of ALD prepared SSE thin films with a thickness range of 5 nm to 30 nm over suspended single-layer graphene was studied using an atomic force microscope (AFM) film deflection technique. Scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM) coupled with AFM was used for microstructural analysis. LTO films exhibited higher stiffness and higher fracture forces as compared to LPO films. Fracture in LTO films occurred directly under the indenter in a brittle fashion, while LPO films failed by a more complex fracture mechanism including significant plastic deformation prior to the onset of complete fracture. The results and methodology described in this work open a new window to identify the potential influence of SSEs mechanical performance on their operation in flexible ASSBs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.899

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNanoscaleSame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207