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 AuLi3 and Au4Li15. 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 AuLi3 at 0.15 V at all conditions tested and Au4Li15 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 Au4Li15. 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)/AuLi3 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".