MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The new-type batteries with ultimate energy density

2022· article· en· W4223645105 on OpenAlexaff
Ming He, Maoxun Wang, Zerui Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Materials and Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattery (electricity)Energy storageAutomotive engineeringEnergy densityElectric vehicleElectrical engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineering physicsEngineeringPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In recent years, many countries have made plans for the development of electric vehicles. In 2021, the EU announced a plan to completely stop the sale of fuel cars by 2035 and replace all fuel cars with pure electric vehicles, reducing the carbon emissions to 100%. This is the most radical emissions reduction plan in history, and it means that the era of pure electric cars has officially arrived. The limited energy density of lithium-ion batteries currently used in cars has hampered the development of electric vehicle mileage. To meet the demand for electric vehicles, the development and research of high energy density batteries are urgent. Based on a review of the current literature, this paper summarizes the development history, working principles, current challenges and solutions of the solid-state battery, lithium-air batteries and nuclear batteries. The current dilemma for solid-state batteries is the lack of a suitable solid electrolyte, which is needed to possess high ionic conductivity of above 10 (mS/cm) at room temperature and negligible electronic conductivity with a high ionic transference number wide electrochemical stability windows. Lithium-air batteries have low power density, battery energy attenuation, and high safety performance. The research and application of nuclear batteries are more difficult, including low energy conversion rate and health problem. The result provides some guidance to researchers initially involved in the high energy density battery industry.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.182 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicAdvanced Battery Materials and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207