Lithium-Gold Electrochemical Alloying: Clarifying Reaction Pathways and Products Using Operando XRD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gold electrodes are used in lithium-ion battery research despite their high cost and unclear reactivity with lithium. Many equilibrium phases of gold-lithium (Au-Li) exist—solid solutions alpha, beta, and delta, and intermetallic phases AuLi 3 and Au 4 Li 15 . During the first alloying reaction, the equilibrium alpha and beta phases are seemingly bypassed; a phase, presumably delta, forms at a potential of 0.25 V (all potentials vs Li/Li + ), followed by the formation of AuLi 3 at 0.15 V at all conditions tested and Au 4 Li 15 at 0.05 V in select conditions. Alloying reactions are reversible to (delta), followed by the formation of another phase near 0.3 V and a low Li content phase at potentials above 0.4 V during de-alloying. Observed diffraction peaks only partially align with previous reports for all phases other than Au 4 Li 15 . The second alloying/de-alloying cycle is reversible between a low Li content phase (not pure gold) and the terminal phase. Some reaction hysteresis is present at low Li content. While the (delta)/AuLi 3 reaction had a consistent potential during alloying and de-alloying, the potential otherwise varied strongly with temperature, rate, and composition, implying that gold quasi-reference electrodes may not be suitable for lithium-ion battery 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".