Back to the future: towards the realization of lithium metal batteries using liquid and solid electrolytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the specific energy of traditional lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) approaches theoretical limits, the quest for alternatives intensifies. Lithium metal batteries (LMBs) stand out as a potential solution, promising substantially higher energy densities (∼35% increase in specific energy and ∼50% increase in energy density at the cell level). Historically, challenges with liquid electrolytes (LEs) in LMBs, such as dendrite growth and unstable solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) formation, led to skepticism about their compatibility and most of the focus was on solid-state electrolytes (SSEs) such as polymer electrolytes and recently inorganic electrolytes (oxides, sulphides halides). However, recent strides in LE engineering have repositioned LEs as viable candidates for LMBs, particularly with the strategic use of additives and the careful formulating of solvents. This review delves into the engineering of LEs for LMBs, highlighting their renewed potential and explores the realm of SSEs and report on the recent advancements in both fields. We aim to provide a comprehensive overview of the evolving landscape of LMB research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".