MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4226134815 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.1c09785

Mixing, Domains, and Fast Li-Ion Dynamics in Ternary Li–Sb–Bi Battery Anode Alloys

2022· article· en· W4226134815 on OpenAlexafffund
W. Peter Kalisvaart, Madhusudan Chaudhary, Amit Bhattacharya, Vladimir K. Michaelis, Jillian M. Buriak

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersWestern Economic Diversification CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsMaterials scienceTernary operationBismuthAnalytical Chemistry (journal)AlloyAntimonyIonCrystallographyMetallurgyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Both antimony and bismuth can alloy with up to three molar equivalents of lithium and are therefore attractive candidates for replacing graphite in Li-ion battery anodes. Li 3 Sb and Li 3 Bi have the same cubic structure ( Fm 3̅ m ), but the ternary Li–Sb–Bi system has not been studied. We synthesized Li 3 (Sb x Bi 1– x ) with different Sb mole fractions at room temperature by ball milling. These ternary alloys all have cubic crystal structures, as determined by X-ray diffraction (XRD), but show a tendency toward phase segregation for x = 0.25 and 0.50. For x = 0.25, the lattice parameter presents a clear positive deviation from Vegard’s law in XRD, while for x = 0.50, XRD reveals two phases after milling, with the Bi-rich minority phase diminishing after thermal annealing. Solid-state nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy provides evidence for a Sb-enriched environment around the Li atoms for Li 3 Sb 0.25 Bi 0.75, and nuclear spin–lattice relaxation measurements of the binary and ternary alloy phases point to low activation energies and rapid Li-ion diffusion in Li 3 Bi.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C→Same topicAdvancements in Battery Materials→French-language works237,207→