MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390176593 · doi:10.3390/coatings14010020

Enhanced Electrochemical Performance of LaMnO3 Nanoparticles by Ca/Sr Doping

2023· article· en· W4390176593 on OpenAlexaff
Hongquan Zhao, Xu Guo, Xiaoyun Jin, Lei Wang, Songtao Dong, Jian Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueCoatings · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSupercapacitor Materials and Fabrication
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNanjing UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMaterials scienceCapacitanceElectrodeDopingElectrochemistryPerovskite (structure)Crystal structureSupercapacitorNanoparticleAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Chemical engineeringNanotechnologyCrystallographyChemistryOptoelectronicsPhysical chemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the sol-gel method was used to synthesize powders of LaMnO3 (LMO), La0.85Ca0.15MnO3 (LCM), and La0.85Sr0.15MnO3 (LSM). The effect of substituting Ca and Sr at the A-site on the perovskite crystal structure and electrochemical capabilities of LMO was investigated. LCM retained its orthogonal structure in comparison to the parent LMO components, whereas LSM transitioned to a rhombic structure. At 0.5 A/g, the specific capacitance of LCM and LSM electrodes is 185.5 F/g and 248 F/g, respectively. The specific capacitance of LCM was three times greater than that of the LMO electrode. Among the three samples (LMO, 22.25 m2 g−1; LSM, 31.56 m2 g−1), the LCM sample exhibited the highest specific surface area of 38.79 m2 g−1. The charge transfer resistances of the LMO, LCM, and LSM are 0.48 Ω, 0.36 Ω, and 0.38 Ω, respectively. The LCM electrode exhibits the greatest capacitance performance due to its more refined morphology, increased concentration of oxygen vacancy, and more complete utilization of the perovskite bulk structure. The above results demonstrate that Ca or Sr substitution of A-site compounds has great potential for supercapacitor applications.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCoatingsSame topicSupercapacitor Materials and FabricationFrench-language works237,207