MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010826465 · doi:10.1149/1945-7111/ab7ce3

The Critical Role of Carbon in the Chemical Delithiation Kinetics of LiFePO<sub>4</sub>

2020· article· en· W3010826465 on OpenAlexaff
Montserrat Galcerán, Abdelbast Guerfi, Michel Armand, Karim Zaghib, Montse Casas‐Cabanas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsHydro-Québec
FundersEusko Jaurlaritza
KeywordsOxidizing agentCarbon fibersLithium (medication)Materials scienceChemical engineeringLithium iron phosphateInorganic chemistryChemistryElectrochemistryElectrodeOrganic chemistryPhysical chemistryComposite materialComposite number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The chemical delithiation of LiFePO4 has been carefully studied using two different types of LiFePO4: (1) carbon coated LiFePO4 and (2) non-carbon coated LiFePO4. We have observed that only carbon coated LiFePO4 can be successfully delithiated at room temperature using Na2S2O8 as oxidizing agent. In order to unravel the role of carbon in the chemical delithiation process of non-carbon coated LiFePO4 we have performed a systematic study using different carbon sources as well as different amount of extraneous carbon in the solution. The results obtained demonstrate that the addition of carbon is fundamental for the effective removal of lithium at room temperature, and only a very small amount of carbon of any nature is enough to achieve the successful chemical delithiation of non-carbon coated LiFePO4.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Electrochemical SocietySame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207