MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4285497377 · doi:10.1149/ma2022-012199mtgabs

Electrolyte Design for Anode-Free Lithium Metal Batteries

2022· article· en· W4285497377 on OpenAlexaff
Chengtian Zhou, Venkataraman Thangadurai

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrolyteAnodeLithium (medication)Battery (electricity)Materials scienceDiglymePower densityChemical engineeringCapacity lossEnergy storageCurrent densityChemistryElectrodeThermodynamicsPhysical chemistryPower (physics)Organic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) are approaching their energy density limits and thus may not keep up with the ever-increasing demand for higher specific energy density in today’s energy storage and power applications. Anode-free lithium metal batteries (AFLMBs) utilize the full theoretical capacity of Li metal anode (3860 mAh g-1, ten times higher than lithiated graphite) and offer lower cost and better safety than cells with Li excess. However, due to the low efficiency of Li deposition and stripping, AFLMBs suffer from rapid capacity loss. In this presentation, we will discuss a unique coin cell configuration design with high compression for AFLMBs. The high pressure leads to more stable cycling performance, providing a more accurate assessment of AFLMBs.1 A carbonate-glyme hybrid electrolyte for AFLMB is demonstrated with a capacity retention of 73% for 50 cycles. The hybrid electrolyte possesses a unique solvation structure, where diglyme solvates both Li-ions and film-forming additive, while carbonates dilute the mixture, enabling facile ion migrations.2 C. Zhou, A. J. Samson, M. A. Garakani, and V. Thangadurai, J. Electrochem. Soc., 168, 060532 (2021). C. Zhou et al., Energy Storage Mater., 42, 295–306 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ensm.2021.07.043.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting Abstracts→Same topicAdvancements in Battery Materials→French-language works237,207→