Unleash the Capacity Potential of LiFePO<sub>4</sub> through Rocking‐Chair Coordination Chemistry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract There is still a considerable gap between the actual and theoretical capacities of the commercial cathode material LiFePO4 (LFP) for lithium‐ion batteries (LIBs). Here, a new strategy to release the full capacity of LFP through the rocking‐chair coordination chemistry is reported. Specifically, the zinc acetate‐diethanolamine complex (Zn(OAc)2·DEA) is used as a functional binder for the LFP cathode, where the N atom of DEA can coordinate with Zn2+, Fe2+, or Fe3+. The bond strength sequence is Fe3+–N > Zn2+–N > Fe2+–N, which makes the N atom swing between Fe3+ on the surface of FePO4 in the charged state and Zn2+ of Zn(OAc)2 in the discharged state. Density functional theory simulations reveal that the adsorption of DEA reduces the surface bandgap and the energy barriers of Li+ diffusion along the [010] direction of LFP, which promotes electronic conduction and Li+ diffusion, respectively. The Zn(OAc)2·DEA‐based LFP electrode achieves a high capacity of 169 mAh g−1 at 0.2C, which approaches the theoretical value of 170 mAh g−1. The electrode also has excellent cycling performance, showing a low capacity decay rate of 0.03% per cycle over 1500 cycles at 5C.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".