Assessing the Electrochemical Stability Window of NASICON-Type Solid Electrolytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
All-Solid-State Lithium Batteries (ASSLBs) are promising since they may enable the use of high potential materials as positive electrode and lithium metal as negative electrode. This is only possible through solid electrolytes (SEs) stated large electrochemical stability window (ESW). Nevertheless, reported values for these ESWs are very divergent in the literature. Establishing a robust procedure to accurately determine SEs’ ESWs has therefore become crucial. Our work focuses on bringing together theoretical results and an original experimental set up to assess the electrochemical stability window of the two NASICON-type SEs Li1.3Al0.3Ti1.7(PO4)3 (LATP) and Li1.5Al0.5Ge1.5(PO4)3 (LAGP). Using first principles, we computed thermodynamic ESWs for LATP and LAGP and their decomposition products upon redox potentials. The experimental set-up consists of a sintered stack of a thin SE layer and a SE-Au composite electrode to allow a large contact surface between SE and conductive gold particles, which maximizes the redox currents. Using Potentiostatic Intermittent Titration Technique (PITT) measurements, we were able to accurately determine the ESW of LATP and LAGP solid electrolytes. They are found to be [2.65–4.6 V] and [1.85–4.9 V] for LATP and LAGP respectively. Finally, we attempted to characterize the decomposition products of both materials upon oxidation. The use of an O2 sensor coupled to the electrochemical setup enabled us to observe operando the production of O2 upon LAGP and LATP oxidations, in agreement with first-principles calculations. Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) allowed to observe the presence of an amorphous phase at the interface between the gold particles and LAGP after oxidation. Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy (EIS) measurements confirmed that the resulting phase increased the total resistance of LAGP. This work aims at providing a method for an accurate determination of ESWs, considered a key parameter to a successful material selection for ASSLBs.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".