MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360603581 · doi:10.1149/1945-7111/acc6f6

Lithium-ion Differential Thermal Analysis Studies of the Effects of Long-Term Li-ion Cell Storage on Electrolyte Composition and Implications for Cell State of Health

2023· article· en· W4360603581 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Bauer, Jessie Harlow, Toren Hynes, J. R. Dahn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Technologies Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrolyteLithium (medication)IonChemistryElectrodeDegradation (telecommunications)Analytical Chemistry (journal)Materials scienceElectrical engineeringChromatographyPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Li-ion cells being developed for long lifetime applications are often subjected to storage tests at various states-of-charge and various temperatures. Storage is interrupted from time to time for reference performance tests so that cell capacity and impedance can be checked. These reference performance tests give no information about any compositional changes that may have occurred in the electrolyte. Lithium-ion differential thermal analysis applied to cells after years of storage can be used to determine if the electrolyte has changed significantly due to unwanted reactions with the electrode materials or if little to no change has occurred. Here, Li-ion differential thermal analysis is used to study electrolyte changes in a more-or-less “yes/no” manner for single crystal NMC532/graphite cells stored between 3.67 and 4.3 V at 20, 40 and 55 °C for up to five years. Such measurements can be used to give confidence about lifetime predictions. Several such cells are detailed here, with correlation between degree of cell degradation and degree of change in electrolyte composition. Relationships are shown between degradation and evolution of state of electrolyte in elevated temperature and voltage storage experiments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Electrochemical SocietySame topicAdvanced Battery Technologies ResearchFrench-language works237,207