MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200498794 · doi:10.1002/celc.202101626

Co‐Doping Strategies to Improve the Electrochemical Properties of Li<sub><i>x</i></sub>Mn<sub>2</sub>O<sub>4</sub> Cathodes for Li‐Ion Batteries

2021· article· en· W4200498794 on OpenAlexafffund
Ramavtar Tyagi, Amirmasoud Lanjan, Seshasai Srinivasan

Bibliographic record

VenueChemElectroChem · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSpinelMaterials scienceDopantYttriumDopingElectrochemistryLithium (medication)ManganeseAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ElectrodeInorganic chemistryOxidePhysical chemistryMetallurgyChemistryOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Four novel cathode electrode materials with improved material properties have been derived from the Lithium Manganese Oxide spinel using co‐doping strategies. Specifically, Aluminum, Nickel, Magnesium, and Yttrium were selected as the primary dopant to replace a fraction of Mn 3+ (5 %), and S 2− was selected as the secondary dopant to replace 1 % of O 2− . A combination of quantum mechanics and molecular dynamics was used to study the fracture mechanics of the new materials for various State of Charge values, and improved performance is validated with experimental data. The results show that lattice constant values for all the doped structures decrease by 1.87 %–2.07 %. Overall, with co‐doping, the diffusion properties improved, and activation energy required for Li + vacancy migration reduced (0.21–0.25 eV). We conclude that with reduced inter‐atomic distance, the overall life of the LMO spinel can be improved. The Computational Fluid Dynamics simulations to study the macro‐scale behaviour of these new materials shows a reduction in intercalation induced stress and heat generation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemElectroChemSame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207