MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165881049 · doi:10.3389/fchem.2021.687392

Advanced TexSy-C Nanocomposites for High-Performance Lithium Ion Batteries

2021· article· en· W3165881049 on OpenAlexafffund
Guolong Lu, Chunnuan Ye, Wenyan Li, Xuedong He, Guang Chen, Jun Li, Huile Jin, Shun Wang, Jichang Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Chemistry · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang ProvinceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMaterials scienceTelluriumElectrochemistryNanocompositeLithium (medication)Chemical engineeringIonAnodeBattery (electricity)NanotechnologyLithium-ion batteryNano-ElectrodeComposite materialChemistryMetallurgyOrganic chemistryPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is dedicated to expand the family of lithium-tellurium sulfide batteries, which have been recognized as a promising choice for future energy storage systems. Herein, a novel electrochemical method has been applied to engineer micro-nano Te x S y material, and it is found that Te x S y phases combined with multi-walled carbon nanotubes endow the as-constructed lithium-ion batteries excellent cycling stability and high rate performance. In the process of material synthesis, the sulfur was successfully embedded into the tellurium matrix, which improved the overall capacity performance. Te x S y was characterized and verified as a micro-nano-structured material with less Te and more S. Compared with the original pure Te particles, the capacity is greatly improved, and the volume expansion change is effectively inhibited. After the assembly of Li-Te x S y battery, the stable electrical contact and rapid transport capacity of lithium ions, as well as significant electrochemical performance are verified.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.916

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in ChemistrySame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207