Realizing High‐Performance Li‐S Batteries through Additive Manufactured and Chemically Enhanced Cathodes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Numerous efforts are made to improve the reversible capacity and long‐term cycling stability of Li‐S cathodes. However, they are susceptible to irreversible capacity loss during cycling owing to shuttling effects and poor Li + transport under high sulfur loading. Herein, a physically and chemically enhanced lithium sulfur cathode is proposed to address these challenges. Additive manufacturing is used to construct numerous microchannels within high sulfur loading cathodes, which enables desirable deposition mechanisms of lithium polysulfides and improves Li + and e ‐ transport. Concurrently, cobalt sulfide is incorporated into the cathode composition and demonstrates strong adsorption behavior toward lithium polysulfides during cycling. As a result, excellent electrochemical performance is obtained by the design of a physically and chemically enhanced lithium sulfur cathode. The reported electrode, with a sulfur loading of 8 mg cm ‐2 , delivers an initial capacity of 1118.8 mA h g ‐1 and a reversible capacity of 771.7 mA h g ‐1 after 150 cycles at a current density of 3 mA cm ‐2 . This work demonstrates that a chemically enhanced sulfur cathode, manufactured through additive manufacturing, is a viable pathway to achieve high‐performance Li‐S 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it