Interface engineering of inorganic solid‐state lithium batteries via atomic and molecular layer deposition
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Currently, conventional organic liquid electrolytes (OLEs) are the main limiting factor for the next generation of high‐energy lithium batteries. There is growing interest in inorganic solid‐state electrolytes (ISEs). However, ISEs still face various challenges in practical applications, particularly at the interface between ISE and the electrode, which significantly affects the performance of solid‐state batteries (SSBs). In recent decades, atomic and molecular layer deposition (ALD and MLD) techniques, widely used to manipulate interface properties and construct novel electrode structures, have emerged as promising strategies to address the interface challenges faced by ISEs. This review focuses on the latest developments and applications of ALD/MLD technology in SSBs, including interface modification of cathodes and lithium metal anodes. From the perspective of interface strategy mechanism, we present experimental progress and computational simulations related to interface chemistry and electrochemical stability in thermodynamic contents. In addition, this article explores the future direction and prospects for ALD/MLD in dynamic stability engineering of interfaces SSBs. image
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it