MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200450500 · doi:10.1039/d1nh00585e

Challenges of layer-structured cathodes for sodium-ion batteries

2021· review· en· W4200450500 on OpenAlexafffund
Caihong Shi, Liguang Wang, Xi’an Chen, Jun Li, Shun Wang, Jichang Wang, Huile Jin

Bibliographic record

VenueNanoscale Horizons · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang ProvinceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCathodeBattery (electricity)Layer (electronics)SodiumIonMaterials scienceSodium-ion batteryNanotechnologyComputer scienceEngineeringChemistryElectrical engineeringMetallurgyElectrodeElectrochemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the most promising alternative to lithium-ion batteries (LIBs), sodium-ion batteries (SIBs) still face many issues that hinder their large-scale commercialization. Layered transition metal oxide cathodes have attracted widespread attention owing to their large specific capacity, high ionic conductivity, and feasible preparation conditions. However, their electrochemical properties are usually limited by the irreversible phase transition and harsh storage conditions caused by humidity sensitivity. Recently, tremendous efforts have been devoted to solving these issues toward advanced high-performance layered oxide cathodes. Herein, we summarize these remaining challenges of layered oxide cathodes and the corresponding modification strategies such as the variations in chemical compositions, the architecture of (nano)micro-structures, surface engineering, and the regulation of phase compositions. We hope that the understanding presented in this review can provide useful guidance to developing high-performance layer-structured cathode materials for advanced SIBs.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations112
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNanoscale HorizonsSame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207