MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177473353 · doi:10.1021/acsami.1c04484

Probing Sulfur Deposition onto Carbon Nanomaterials from Aqueous, Elemental Sulfur Sols for Lithium–Sulfur Batteries

2021· article· en· W3177473353 on OpenAlexafffund
Gillian F. Hawes, Christian Punckt, Michael A. Pope

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Applied Materials & Interfaces · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Materials and Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSulfurMaterials scienceNucleationGrapheneCarbon fibersNanomaterialsChemical engineeringOxideDeposition (geology)Lithium (medication)Inorganic chemistryAqueous solutionCathodeLithium–sulfur batteryNanotechnologyElectrochemistryComposite numberChemistryOrganic chemistryComposite materialMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sulfur cathodes for lithium–sulfur batteries often rely on integrating sulfur with high surface area carbonaceous materials. Nanoscale mixing is typically achieved by a lengthy, high-temperature melt imbibition approach that employs carbon nanomaterials in an aggregated solid form. In this work, we present a simple strategy to coat carbon nanomaterials with sulfur in a cost-effective, room-temperature process using inexpensive elemental sulfur. Our results are based on hydrophobic sulfur sols, which have rarely been examined for use in the preparation of sulfur cathodes. We study the deposition mechanism on different carbon materials and find that sulfur dissolves from the sol into the aqueous phase and coats the surface of reduced graphene oxide (rGO) by heterogeneous nucleation and growth, but that this mechanism is not favored for carbon materials such as Ketjen black (KB) and graphene oxide (GO), for which undesirable homogeneous nucleation of micron-sized, insulating sulfur crystals is observed. High loading (3–4 mg sulfur /cm 2 ) rGO-based cathodes prepared using this approach achieve discharge capacities of 1300 mAh/g sulfur (∼4.8 mAh/cm 2 ) at 0.1C and achieve capacities 7-fold higher than cells prepared via traditional melt imbibition approaches at higher rates of 0.8C and 1C. Cells prepared without the need for added binder or conductive additive achieve projected full cell energy densities of 468 Wh/kg at 0.1C when taking into account all inactive components and assuming no lithium metal degradation, indicating that the deposition of sulfur from hydrophobic sols onto carbon nanomaterials can serve as a simple, aqueous-based, one-step process to prepare high sulfur loading cathodes with high projected energy densities.

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 score0.003

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Applied Materials & InterfacesSame topicAdvanced Battery Materials and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207