MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3116461026 · doi:10.1149/1945-7111/abd60b

In Situ Strain Measurement in Solid-State Li-Ion Battery Electrodes

2020· article· en· W3116461026 on OpenAlexaff
Behrad Koohbor, Lingzi Sang, Ömer Özgür Çapraz, Andrew A. Gewirth, Nancy R. Sottos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrolyteElectrodeMaterials scienceBattery (electricity)ElectrochemistryCyclic voltammetryComposite materialAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Chemical engineeringChemistryPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Volumetric changes occur in electrodes of rechargeable Li-ion batteries during charge-discharge cycles. In solid-state batteries, the resulting strains cause mechanical degradation of the electrodes, solid electrolyte (SE) and/or SE-electrode interface due to the presence of brittle interfaces as well as mechanical constraints. Here, we investigate the chemo-mechanical response in working electrodes of solid-state Li-ion batteries. In situ strains are measured by full-field optical Digital Image Correlation (DIC) in a high stiffness oxide solid electrolyte, LAGP, along with a model Au working electrode during cyclic voltammetry. Mechanical deformations are correlated with electrochemical performance and damage mechanisms. The measured strains are large enough to induce cracking in the solid electrolyte. Moreover, we show the chemo-mechanical strains developed in electrodes of a solid-state battery are less reversible than those of liquid electrolyte 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 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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations26
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Electrochemical SocietySame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207