MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088148572 · doi:10.1002/batt.202000200

Ultrafast Inside‐Out NMR Assessment of Rechargeable Cells

2020· article· en· W3088148572 on OpenAlexafffund
Roberta Pigliapochi, Stefan Benders, Emilia V. Silletta, Stephen Glazier, Elizabeth Lee, J. R. Dahn, Alexej Jerschow

Bibliographic record

VenueBatteries & Supercaps · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersDivision of Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and Transport SystemsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDalhousie UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCathodeBattery (electricity)ElectrodeElectrolyteMagnetic fieldMagnetic resonance imagingMaterials scienceElectrical conductorNuclear magnetic resonanceOptoelectronicsComputer scienceChemistryPower (physics)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rechargeable battery cells are notoriously difficult to analyze. Conductive casings and the close spacing between electrode layers prevent the penetration of radiofrequency into the active compartment, and thus preclude direct nuclear magnetic resonance studies of cells unless they are specifically designed for such studies. Recently, an inside‐out magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) method was developed that allowed measuring the magnetic field distributions in the volume surrounding the cells, and inferring internal parameters, such as the state of charge and current distributions. While the imaging approach provides a potentially very detailed picture of internal mechanisms, it can often be sensitive to background gradients and can be slow. In this work, an alternative approach is presented, which is based on the acquisition of free induction decays in the sample volume surrounding the cells. The signals encode intrinsic battery properties via the induced magnetic fields from the battery materials. A large range of cells were studied with different cathode materials, electrolyte amounts and cycle numbers (age). The spectroscopic signatures from these studies are shown to provide strong classification power for cathode materials. In addition, the derived principal components follow distinct pathways as a function of state of charge. The method is simple and fast (completes in less than a second), and requires only minimal hardware.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBatteries & SupercapsSame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207