Comprehensive Review of Polymer Architecture for All-Solid-State Lithium Rechargeable Batteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solid-state batteries are an emerging option for next-generation traction batteries because they are safe and have a high energy density. Accordingly, in polymer research, one of the main goals is to achieve solid polymer electrolytes (SPEs) that could be facilely fabricated into any preferred size of thin films with high ionic conductivity as well as favorable mechanical properties. In particular, in the past two decades, many polymer materials of various structures have been applied to improve the performance of SPEs. In this review, the influences of polymer architecture on the physical and electrochemical properties of an SPE in lithium solid polymer batteries are systematically summarized. The discussion mainly focuses on four principal categories: linear, comb-like, hyper-branched, and crosslinked polymers, which have been widely reported in recent investigations as capable of optimizing the balance between mechanical resistance, ionic conductivity, and electrochemical stability. This paper presents new insights into the design and exploration of novel high-performance SPEs for lithium solid polymer batteries.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".