MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005459336 · doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b04452

Behavior of Solid Electrolyte in Li-Polymer Battery with NMC Cathode via in-Situ Scanning Electron Microscopy

2020· article· en· W3005459336 on OpenAlexafffund
Shirin Kaboli, Hendrix Demers, Andrea Paolella, Ali Darwiche, Martin Dontigny, Daniel Clément, Abdelbast Guerfi, Michel L. Trudeau, John B. Goodenough, Karim Zaghib

Bibliographic record

VenueNano Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsHydro-Québec
FundersHydro-Québec
KeywordsCathodeScanning electron microscopeIn situElectrolyteMaterials scienceBattery (electricity)PolymerElectron microscopeElectrochemistryChemical engineeringElectrodeNanotechnologyChemistryOpticsComposite materialPhysical chemistryPhysicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the first results of in situ scanning electron microscopy (SEM) of an all-solid Li battery with a nickel–manganese–cobalt–oxide (NMC-622) cathode at 50 °C and an operating voltage of 2.7–4.3 V. Experiments were conducted under a constant current at several C rates (nC rate: cycling in 1/n h): C/12, C/6, and C/3. The microstructure evolution during cycling was monitored by continuous secondary electron imaging. We found that the chemical degradation of the solid polymer electrolyte (SPE) was the main mechanism for battery failure. This degradation was observed in the form of a gradual thinning of the SPE as a function of cycling time, resulting in gas generation from the cell. We also present various dynamic electrochemical and mechanical phenomena, as observed by SEM images, and compare the performance of this battery with that of an all-solid Li battery with a LiFePO4 cathode.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.239 · 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.

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

Citations127
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNano LettersSame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207