Interfaces in Garnet‐Based All‐Solid‐State Lithium Batteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract All‐solid‐state lithium batteries (ASSLBs) are considered to be the next‐generation energy storage system, because of their overwhelming advantages in energy density and safety compared to conventional lithium ion batteries. Among various systems, garnet‐based ASSLBs are one of the most promising candidates. The advantages arise from the intrinsic properties of garnet electrolytes, especially the high shear modulus and wider electrochemical window compared to that of polymer and sulfide electrolytes, guaranteeing the application of Li metal and high voltage cathodes. However, the interfacial issues between garnets and electrodes (Li metal and cathodes) are challenging and hinder the further development of garnet‐based ASSLBs. Herein, the origin of interfacial resistance and recent development of interfacial construction in garnet‐based ASSLBs are reviewed, as well as the subsequent interfacial degradation and cell failure during cycling process, including inhomogeneous plating and stripping, Li dendrites, and strain induced microcracks in stiff electrodes. Finally, the future challenges and opportunities in this important and exciting field are also presented.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".