MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309838310 · doi:10.1149/ma2022-024441mtgabs

(Digital Presentation) Investigation on Reusability of Garnet-Type Ta-Doped Li<sub>7</sub>La<sub>3</sub>Zr<sub>2</sub>O<sub>12</sub> Solid Electrolyte Degraded By Li Dendrite Growth

2022· article· en· W4309838310 on OpenAlexaff
Ryoji Inada, Shotaro Miyake, Venkataraman Thangadurai

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Materials and Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceElectrolyteAnodeFast ion conductorShort circuitChemical engineeringElectrical engineeringElectrodeChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Development of solid inorganic lithium (Li) ion conducting materials for the use as solid electrolytes is indispensable for the realization of next-generation all-solid-state Li batteries with high safety and reliability. Among various oxide-based solid electrolyte materials, a garnet-type oxide with the formula of Li7La3Zr2O12 (LLZO) has attracted much attention because of its high Li ion conductivity at room temperature, excellent thermal performance, and high stability against Li metal.1,2) However, the formation of a solid-solid interface between LLZO and the Li metal anode is challenging. Poor interfacial connection causes non-uniform Li plating and intergranular penetration of Li dendrite in polycrystalline LLZO when the cell is cycled particularly at high current densities, resulting in internal short-circuit failure.3–5) There is no doubt that the establishment of prevention technology for short-circuit failures is a top priority issue for the development of all-solid-state Li metal batteries.5) On the other hand, from the viewpoint of effective use of material resources, the possibility of reusing LLZO extracted from a solid-state battery after a short-circuit failure occurred is worth considering. In this work, we investigated the reusability of a Ta-doped Li6.55La3Zr1.55Ta0.45O12 (Ta-LLZO) solid electrolyte shorted by Li dendrite growth during electrochemical Li plating/stripping testing for a Li/Ta-LLZO/Li symmetric cell. Ta-LLZO was taken out of a tested cell after the degradation by Li dendrite growth occurred, and then annealed at 700 ºC in air. The annealing temperature was set to suppress possible excess Li loss from Ta-LLZO during post-annealing.6) In the first Li plating/stripping test, the cell was shorted at 0.85 mA cm-2 and the dark gray area with possible Li dendrite growth was confirmed on the surface of Ta-LLZO. This dark gray area turned white but slightly different from the original color of Ta-LLZO by post-annealing. The ionic conductivity of as-synthesized and post-annealed Ta-LLZO was measured and compared. Post-annealed Ta-LLZO retained high room temperature ionic conductivity of 0.82 mS cm-1, which is slightly lower than the conductivity of as-synthesized one (= 0.90 mS cm-1). We also prepared a symmetric cell with the post-annealed Ta-LLZO and Li metal electrodes and the second Li plating/stripping test was carried out. Symmetric cell with post-annealed Ta-LLZO showed stable voltage response. This indicates the possibility of reusing the degraded garnet-type solid electrolyte by Li dendrite growth for an another solid-state Li battery. References 1. R. Murugan, V. Thangadurai, W. Weppner, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 46, 7778−7781 (2007). 2. A.J. Samson, K. Hofstetter, S. Bag, V. Thangadurai, Energy Environ. Sci. 12, 2957−2975 (2019). 3. E.J. Cheng, A. Sharafi, J. Sakamoto, Electrochim. Acta 223, 85−91 (2017). 4. R. Inada, S. Yasuda, H. Hosokawa, M. Saito, T. Tojo, Y. Sakurai, Batteries 4, 26 (2018). 5. S. Sarkar, V. Thangadurai, ACS Energy Lett. 7, 1492–1527 (2022). 6. R. Inada, A. Takeda, Y. Yamazaki, S. Miyake. Y. Sakurai, V. Thangadurai, ACS Appl. Energy Mater. 3, 12517–12524 (2020). Figure 1

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 score0.005

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 AbstractsSame topicAdvanced Battery Materials and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207