MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394890055 · doi:10.1002/aenm.202304025

Comprehensive Dopant Screening in Li<sub>7</sub>La<sub>3</sub>Zr<sub>2</sub>O<sub>12</sub> Garnet Solid Electrolyte

2024· article· en· W4394890055 on OpenAlexafffund
Ethan Anderson, Elliot Zolfaghar, Antranik Jonderian, Rustam Z. Khaliullin, Eric McCalla

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Energy Materials · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Battery Materials and Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDopantMaterials scienceTetragonal crystal systemDopingIonic conductivityElectrolyteConductivityValence (chemistry)Dopant ActivationIonic bondingNanotechnologyChemical engineeringAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Crystal structureIonCrystallographyOptoelectronicsPhysical chemistryElectrode

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Promising Li 7 La 3 Zr 2 O 12 (LLZO) garnet electrolytes for solid Li batteries are highly sensitive to doping to modify performance. Herein, LLZO samples with 59 different elemental dopants are synthesized with substitutions on each of the 3 sites (177 total materials). Many potential dopants successfully integrate into the LLZO garnet crystal structure (either cubic or tetragonal), while doping on the optimum site predicted from either previous DFT calculations or the far cheaper bond valence calculations promotes the cubic phase. Room temperature ionic conductivities of up to 1.2 × 10 −3 S cm −1 are achieved demonstrating the quality of materials made in high‐throughput here, and 36 different dopants yield a &gt;10x improvement in conductivity over undoped LLZO. This opens up dramatically the playground for new garnet materials. Other important metrics for electrolytes are also screened systematically. Electronic conductivity is generally suppressed with doping, though certain dopants need to be avoided as they enhance the risk of dendrite formation. The electrochemical stability window of the doped LLZO samples is also screened carefully and shows tunability with certain dopants improving the high voltage stability while others help at low voltage. The results will therefore serve to guide rational codoping studies to combine the benefits of various dopants.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.207 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations48
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Energy MaterialsSame topicAdvanced Battery Materials and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207