MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391662616 · doi:10.1149/ma2023-026901mtgabs

(Invited) Improving Our Understanding of Conducting Polymer Binders

2023· article· en· W4391662616 on OpenAlexaff
Christian Kuß, Anh Ngoc Tram, Van At Nguyen, Mariam Odetallah, Marco Lobato de Faria

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicConducting polymers and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceConductive polymerPolymer sciencePolymerNanotechnologyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As lithium-ion batteries reach their intrinsic performance limits, next-generation battery technology arises that relies much more strongly on the electrode matrix. Traditional compositions of binders and conductive additives with non-polar surfaces face intrinsic obstacles in these developments. In many next-generation electrode formulations, this incompatibility reveals itself through particle disconnection, increased electrode inhomogeneity 1 , and conductive additive agglomeration 2 . Conducting polymers are an apparent solution to such problems. Conducting polymers and their composites can be designed to exhibit increased adhesion, stronger interactions with active material surfaces and electrolytes, and favorable mechanical properties, while providing electronic connectivity at the adhesive contact with the active material 3 . Many examples have been presented in the literature that demonstrate improved electrode performance using such composites 4–6 . A common form of conducting polymer composites combines an intrinsically conductive polymer (e.g. polypyrrole, polythiophene, polyaniline) with a polyelectrolyte (e.g. polacrylate, polystyrene sulfonate, carboxymethyl cellulose). This presentation discusses an exploration of some of the fundamental properties of composites of polypyrrole with carboxymethyl cellulose. The work shows intrinsically favorable properties of the composite for application in batteries 7 . Among those properties are that it can be easily processed in water and N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone, exhibits better adhesion to the current collector, shows competitive conductivity and distributes evenly across active materials. However, it will also be shown that the native structure of this composite is not ideal for long-range conduction and that improvement can be made to the material’s conductivity and capacitance 8 . Our work is targeting a more complete understanding of the properties of these composites as they are employed in battery environments. It demonstrates enormous promise for the use of conducting polymers as binders, but also gaps in our understanding of their interactions with electrolytes and active materials that need to be addressed to advance their impact on the development of next-generation batteries. References: Müller, S. et al. Nat. Commun. 9 , 2340 (2018). Scipioni, R. et al. J. Power Sources 307 , 259–269 (2016). Nguyen, V. A. & Kuss, C. J. Electrochem. Soc. 167 , 065501 (2020). Kim, J. M. et al. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 6 , 12789–12797 (2014). Salem, N., Lavrisa, M. & Abu-Lebdeh, Y. Energy Technol. 4 , 331–340 (2016). Higgins, T. M. et al. ACS Nano 10 , 3702–3713 (2016). Nguyen, V. A., Wang, J. & Kuss, C. J. Power Sources Adv. 6 , 100033 (2020). Nguyen, V. A., Odetallah, M., Bakir, G., Gough, K. & Kuss, C. ACS Omega (2022).

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)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.647

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicConducting polymers and applicationsFrench-language works237,207