Lithium Manganese Spinel Cathodes for Lithium‐Ion Batteries
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Spinel LiMn 2 O 4 , whose electrochemical activity was first reported by Prof. John B. Goodenough's group at Oxford in 1983, is an important cathode material for lithium‐ion batteries that has attracted continuous academic and industrial interest. It is cheap and environmentally friendly, and has excellent rate performance with 3D Li + diffusion channels. However, it suffers from severe degradation, especially under extreme voltages and during high‐temperature operation. Here, the current understanding and future trends of the spinel cathode and its derivatives with cubic lattice symmetry (LiNi 0.5 Mn 1.5 O 4 that shows high‐voltage stability, and Li‐rich spinels that show reversible hybrid anion‐ and cation‐redox activities) are discussed. Special attention is given to the degradation mechanisms and further development of spinel cathodes, as well as concepts of utilizing the cubic spinel structure to stabilize high‐capacity layered cathodes and as robust framework for high‐rate electrodes. “Good spinel” surface phases like LiNi 0.5 Mn 1.5 O 4 are distinguished from “bad spinel” surface phases like Mn 3 O 4 .
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it