Combined recovery of valuable metals from <scp> LiFePO <sub>4</sub> </scp> – <scp> LiCoO <sub>2</sub> </scp> system without adding oxidant and reductant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Based on the oxidation of ferrous ions in lithium iron phosphate and reduction of trivalent cobalt ions in lithium cobaltate, an innovative combined recovery process of lithium iron phosphate and lithium cobaltate powders is proposed. The effects of leaching conditions on leaching performance are studied and the optimal leaching conditions are obtained. Under these conditions, the leaching efficiencies of lithium and cobalt ions reach up to 99.92% and 81.11%, respectively. After removing ferric ions from leachate, the cobalt and lithium ions are separately recovered from the leaching solution. The final precipitation rate of cobalt ions is up to 97.71% with the purity of cobalt oxalate as 99.94%. In addition, the precipitation rate of lithium ions is 78.54% and the purity of lithium carbonate reaches up to 99.94%. Finally, the reaction path and mechanism for the combined recovery of lithium iron phosphate–lithium cobaltate system are preliminary investigated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".