MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293171354 · doi:10.1002/cjce.24617

Selective leaching of lithium ions from <scp>LiFePO<sub>4</sub></scp> powders using hydrochloric acid and sodium hypochlorite system

2022· article· en· W4293171354 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wei Liu, Kang Li, Wei Wang, Yulei Hu, Zhongqi Ren, Zhiyong Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExtraction and Separation Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Beijing MunicipalityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsLeaching (pedology)Hydrochloric acidLithium iron phosphateX-ray photoelectron spectroscopySodium carbonateInorganic chemistrySelective leachingMaterials scienceIron phosphateScanning electron microscopeChemistryPhosphateNuclear chemistrySodiumChemical engineeringMetallurgyElectrochemistrySulfuric acidOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract High‐efficiency and selective leaching of lithium ions from spent lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4) batteries is currently an urgent problem to be solved. Hydrochloric acid and sodium hypochlorite were used as acidic media and oxidant for recycling LiFePO4 powders based on the stoichiometric ratio. The effect of operation conditions on leaching performance was investigated. The leaching yield of Li and Fe were higher than 95% and lower than 0.1% within 20 min at 15°C. In addition, X‐ray diffraction, X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy, and laser particle size analysis characterizations were applied for revealing the selective leaching mechanism, the results of which indicated that the crystal structure of powders remained basically unchanged during the leaching process. Finally, an efficient and cost‐effective recycling process for LiFePO4 powders was proposed, and lithium carbonate products with purity higher than 99.7% were obtained. The proposed recycling process shows strong industrial application potential for LiFePO4 powders.

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations41
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicExtraction and Separation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207