MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013818109 · doi:10.15273/pnsis.v50i2.10006

Optimising 3-phenyl-1,4,2-dioxazol-5-one as an electrolyte additive for Lithium-Ion cells

2020· article· en· W3013818109 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Toren Hynes

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Nova Scotian Institute of Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Materials and Technologies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsElectrolyteRenewable energyLithium (medication)Ethylene carbonateBattery (electricity)Energy storageLithium-ion batteryEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceChemistryElectrical engineeringEngineeringPhysicsPower (physics)MedicineElectrode

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An effective method to reduce carbon dioxide emissions is to switch to renewables for energy generation and transportation. Since current sources of renewable energy, such as wind and solar, are intermittent, it is essential to find ways to store energy to match supply and demand. If vehicles are to be powered by renewable energy, they need portable energy storage. Currently, lithium-ion batteries are one of the most viable solutions for energy storage. Extending the lifespan of lithium-ion batteries is the goal of this research, carried out with Dr. David Hall of Dr. Jeff Dahn’s research group at Dalhousie University in late 2017. We developed and tested a chemical compound, 3-phenyl-1,4,2-dioxazol-5-one (PDO), which greatly improves the lifespan of lithium-ion batteries. One percent of this by weight in a cell’s electrolyte, along with two percent ethylene sulfate, will extend a battery’s lifespan more than three-fold over those containing conventional vinylene carbonate-containing electrolyte.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Nova Scotian Institute of ScienceSame topicAdvanced Battery Materials and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207