MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281993011 · doi:10.1149/1945-7111/ac76e5

Melt Synthesis of Lithium Manganese Iron Phosphate: Part II. Particle Size, Electrochemical Performance, and Solid-State Lithium Diffusion

2022· article· en· W4281993011 on OpenAlexaff
Erin Lyle, Ron Vaeli, Marc M. E. Cormier, Michael Metzger

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLithium (medication)DiffusionManganeseParticle sizeParticle (ecology)RedoxMaterials scienceElectrochemistryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Lithium iron phosphateChemistryElectrodeThermodynamicsMetallurgyPhysical chemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Melt synthesis is a fast and simple process to make dense LiMnyFe1−yPO4 (LMFP with 0 ≤ y ≤ 1) from all-dry, low-cost precursors with zero waste. Part one of this study confirmed that highly crystalline and phase pure LMFP materials can be made by melt synthesis. This part shows that planetary milling can reduce the primary particle size of melt LMFP (0%–75% Mn) to ∼200 nm, which is smaller than the primary particles in commercial LFP reference material (0% Mn). However, further particle size reduction is needed to reach particle sizes below 70 nm observed in reference LMFP (79% Mn). Melt LFP shows almost identical specific capacity and charge/discharge voltage as reference LFP. Melt LMFP materials show a high voltage Mn plateau at ∼4 V associated with the Mn2+/3+ redox, the length of which scales with Mn content. The Mn plateau raises the average discharge voltage of LMFP; hence a minimum specific discharge capacity between 160 mAh g−1 (0% Mn) and 145 mAh g−1 (80% Mn) is sufficient to match the volumetric energy density of LFP. The Atlung Method for Intercalant Diffusion shows that the lithium diffusion coefficient in LMFP is ∼1 order of magnitude higher in the voltage region of the Fe2+/3+ redox couple (3.75–3.1 V vs Li+/Li) than in the voltage region of the Mn2+/3+ redox couple (4.3–3.75 V vs Li+/Li). This emphasizes the need for very small primary particles when making LMFP with relatively high Mn content.

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 score0.003

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 head0.208
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations22
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Electrochemical SocietySame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207