MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3173109118 · doi:10.1021/acs.chemmater.1c01490

Metastability in Li–La–Ti–O Perovskite Materials and Its Impact on Ionic Conductivity

2021· article· en· W3173109118 on OpenAlexafffund
Antranik Jonderian, Michelle Ting, Eric McCalla

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry of Materials · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Materials and Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceIonic conductivityPerovskite (structure)Rietveld refinementFast ion conductorPhase (matter)Lithium (medication)Ionic bondingElectrolyteConductivityDielectric spectroscopySinteringMetastabilityChemical engineeringAnalytical Chemistry (journal)CrystallographyIonCrystal structurePhysical chemistryComposite materialChemistryElectrochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A great number of candidates exist for solid electrolytes in all-solid Li batteries. This study represents the first in a series using combinatorial synthesis, X-ray diffraction (XRD), and impedance spectroscopy to screen for better solid electrolytes. Herein, over 576 Li–La–Ti–O samples are synthesized and characterized by XRD. Phase compositions are determined using automated Rietveld refinement, and the resulting phase stabilities provide important insights into this class of materials. This system includes the lithium lanthanum titanate (LLTO) perovskite structures. Of highest importance, we find that the perovskite structure is not stabilized as a pure phase at any composition but rather as composites wherein LLTO is stabilized by the presence of secondary phases at high temperature, and at some compositions, these composites are further favored during slow cooling. This new means of stabilizing metastable phases is of interest in itself, but it also proves important in designing solid electrolytes as the ionic conductivities vary dramatically with changes in the secondary phase content. We find ionic conductivities as high as 5 × 10–5 S cm–1 in total and >10–3 S cm–1 in the bulk in a sample where the secondary phase is TiO2 with a composition of 9 molar %. Both conductivity values are highly competitive with the state-of-the-art, even though more cost-effective sintering protocols are used herein (far shorter heating times and lower temperatures). We find that TiO2 helps lower the grain boundary energy in the composite electrolytes and speculate that it may be acting as a sintering agent. This study therefore helps to decouple the effects of composition and synthesis conditions that have plagued the understanding of this class of material. Thus, this work not only serves as a proof of concept for the use of combinatorial methods in studying solid electrolytes but also gives significant insights into the importance of secondary phases in ionic transport, and this is done for a class of materials that has proven to be particularly challenging. Given the negligible focus on secondary phases in the literature of solid electrolytes, these findings will be of use in further explorations of other classes of solid electrolytes.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.242 · 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.

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

Citations28
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistry of MaterialsSame topicAdvanced Battery Materials and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207