Combining Experimental and Theoretical Techniques to Gain an Atomic Level Understanding of the Defect Binding Mechanism in Hard Carbon Anodes for Sodium Ion Batteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Sodium ion batteries (NIBs) are an attractive alternative to lithium‐ion batteries in applications that require large‐scale energy storage due to sodium's high natural abundance and low cost. Hard carbon (HC) is the most promising anode material for NIBs; however, there is a knowledge gap in the understanding of the sodium binding mechanism that prevents a rational design of HC. This study tunes sucrose‐derived HC via synthesis temperature then evaluates the structural, physical, and electrochemical properties. Neutron total scattering is used to generate structural models by fitting pair distribution functions (PDF) with a combination of molecular dynamics and reverse Monte Carlo methods. From this model, the number and type of structural features are identified, quantified, and correlated to the galvanostatic charge/discharge. A method of PDF “fingerprinting” binding sites using Na probe atoms is developed and analyzing these PDFs reveals an atomistic view of ion binding sites responsible for “defect” storage mechanisms. Combining these techniques results in an atomic‐level study that provides a big picture of the Na‐binding mechanism in NIBs, which allows for more precise tuning of the structure–property relationships in the future. The methodologies developed will also enable new strategies for the analysis of amorphous functional materials.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".