Toward an All‐Ceramic Cathode–Electrolyte Interface with Low‐Temperature Pressed NASICON Li<sub>1.5</sub>Al<sub>0.5</sub>Ge<sub>1.5</sub>(PO<sub>4</sub>)<sub>3</sub> Electrolyte
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This work shows, for the first time, the critical influence of pressure during the hot sintering stage on the ionic conductivity of the lithium super ionic conductor Li1.5Al0.5Ge1.5(PO4)3. A hot press method is developed to obtain high ionic conductivities at the significantly decreased densification temperature of only 650 °C by applying pressure (56 MPa). Considering the possible initiation of undesirable decomposition reactions when cathode materials are annealed at high temperature (typically ≥700 °C), the use of high pressure at 650 °C can significantly limit the formation of degradation by‐products. This study determines the criteria required to optimize the pressure and temperature parameters for enhancing the total ionic conductivity. Finally, this study reports an all solid‐state battery based on a LiFePO4 olivine cathode prepared at 650 °C showing very good Li‐intercalation/deintercalation performance. Good ionic interfacial contact is achieved without using polymer and liquid 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".