MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200496185 · doi:10.1002/smm2.1076

Recent progress and future perspectives of flexible metal‐air batteries

2021· article· en· W4200496185 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tingzhen Li, Xinwen Peng, Peng Cui, Ge Shi, Yang Wu, Zehong Chen, Yongfa Huang, Yongkang Chen, Jinyuan Peng, Ren Zou, Xiaoyan Zeng, Jian Yu, Jianyun Gan, Zhiyuan Mu, Yuling Chen, Jiaming Zeng, Juan Liu, Yunyi Yang, Yujia Wei, Jun Lü

Bibliographic record

VenueSmartMat · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Materials and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice of ScienceArgonne National LaboratoryState Key Laboratory of Pulp and Paper EngineeringBasic and Applied Basic Research Foundation of Guangdong ProvinceChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaUniversity of ChicagoOffice of Energy Efficiency and Renewable EnergyCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of CanadaU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)Battery (electricity)AdaptabilityEnergy storageEnergy densityNanotechnologyComputer scienceSystems engineeringEngineeringMaterials scienceEngineering physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract With the rapid development of wearable and intelligent flexible electronic devices (FEDs), the demand for flexible energy storage/conversion devices (ESCDs) has also increased. Rechargeable flexible metal‐air batteries (MABs) are expected to be one of the most ideal ESCDs due to their high theoretical energy density, cost advantage, and strong deformation adaptability. With the improvement of the device design, material assemblies, and manufacturing technology, the research on the electrochemical performance of flexible MABs has made significant progress. However, achieving the high mechanical flexibility, high safety, and wearable comfortability required by FEDs while maintaining the high performance of flexible MABs are still a daunting challenge. In this review, flexible Zn‐air and Li‐air batteries are mainly exemplified to describe the most recent progress and challenges of flexible MABs. We start with an overview of the structure and configuration of the flexible MABs and discuss their impact on battery performance and function. Then it focuses on the research progress of flexible metal anodes, gel polymer electrolytes, and air cathodes. Finally, the main challenges and future research perspectives involving flexible MABs for FEDs are proposed.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
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

Citations76
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSmartMatSame topicAdvanced Battery Materials and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207