MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008825548 · doi:10.1002/smll.201907141

Mild‐Temperature Solution‐Assisted Encapsulation of Phosphorus into ZIF‐8 Derived Porous Carbon as Lithium‐Ion Battery Anode

2020· article· en· W3008825548 on OpenAlexaff
Chengzhan Yan, Huaping Zhao, Jun Li, Huile Jin, Long Liu, Wanyi Wu, Jichang Wang, Yong Lei, Shun Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueSmall · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaChina Scholarship CouncilDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsAnodeMaterials scienceChemical engineeringElectrochemistryPorosityCarbon fibersComposite numberInorganic chemistryComposite materialElectrodeChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The high theoretical capacity of red phosphorus (RP) makes it a promising anode material for lithium‐ion batteries. However, the large volume change of RP during charging/discharging imposes an adverse effect on the cyclability and the rate performance suffers from its low conductivity. Herein, a facile solution‐based strategy is exploited to incorporate phosphorus into the pores of zeolitic imidazole framework (ZIF‐8) derived carbon hosts under a mild temperature. With this method, the blocky RP is etched into the form of polyphosphides anions (PP, mainly P5−) so that it can easily diffuse into the pores of porous carbon hosts. Especially, the indelible crystalline surface phosphorus can be effectively avoided, which usually generates in the conventional vapor‐condensation encapsulation method. Moreover, highly‐conductive ZIF‐8 derived carbon hosts with any pore smaller than 3 nm are efficient for loading PP and these pores can alleviate the volume change well. Finally, the composite of phosphorus encapsulated into ZIF‐8 derived porous carbon exhibits a significantly improved electrochemical performance as lithium‐ion battery anode with a high capacity of 786 mAh g−1 after 100 cycles at 0.1 A g−1, a good stability within 700 cycles at 1 A g−1, and an excellent rate performance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations71
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSmallSame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207