MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984942060 · doi:10.1038/s42004-019-0234-0

In situ observation of solid electrolyte interphase evolution in a lithium metal battery

2019· article· en· W2984942060 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Chemistry · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityHydro-Québec
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsAnodeMaterials scienceElectrolyteThermal runawayGrain boundaryLithium (medication)Dendrite (mathematics)Lithium metalBattery (electricity)PolymerScanning electron microscopeMetalComposite materialElectrodeChemical engineeringMetallurgyChemistryMicrostructurePower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Lithium metal is a favorable anode material in all-solid Li-polymer batteries because of its high energy density. However, dendrite formation on lithium metal causes safety concerns. Here we obtain images of the Li-metal anode surface during cycling using in situ scanning electron microscopy. Constructing videos from the images enables us to monitor the failure mechanism of the battery. Our results show the formation of dendrites on the edge of the anode and isles of decomposed lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide on the grain boundaries. Cycling at high rates results in the opening of the grain boundaries and depletion of lithium in the vicinity of the isles. We also observe changes in the surface morphology of the polymer close to the anode edge. Extrusion of lithium from these regions could be evidence of polymer reduction due to a local increase in temperature and thermal runaway assisting in dendrite formation.

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 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.257 · 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