MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408814570 · doi:10.1016/j.mtener.2025.101868

Exploring the limitations and unlocking the potential of sodium-ion battery cathodes

2025· article· en· W4408814570 on OpenAlexaff
Fatima Tasneem Mohsin, Nazmul Hossain, Tamzeed Ahmed Alvy, Tasnuva Sharmin, Md Azazul Haque, Mohammad Muhtasim Mashfy, Mohammed Awad Mousa, Mohammad Nasim

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials Today Energy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Battery Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceCathodeBattery (electricity)SodiumSodium-ion batteryIonEngineering physicsNanotechnologyAnodeElectrical engineeringEngineeringMetallurgyElectrodeOrganic chemistryPhysical chemistryThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing demand for sustainable energy solutions led to the advancement of alternative energy storage devices beyond lithium-ion batteries (LIBs). Sodium-ion batteries (SIBs) have emerged as a viable substitute for LIBs owing to sodium's abundance and electrochemical characteristics similar to those of lithium. However, the commercialization of SIBs is impeded by issues related to the performance of cathode materials, including phase instability, low energy density, and poor cycling performance. This review offers a comprehensive evaluation of the four main categories of cathode materials for SIB—Transition metal oxides, Polyanionic compounds, Prussian blue analogues, and Organic materials, highlighting their advantages and limitations comprising of instability and poor conductivity. Recent advancement in SIB cathode material along with improvement strategies such as element doping, surface coatings, and structural modifications, have significantly improved the energy density, structural stability, and cycle performance but challenges such as irreversible phase transitions, air sensitivity, and sluggish Na-ion diffusion remains. This study underscores techniques that alleviate these problems and enhance the electrochemical performance of SIBs. Furthermore, research avenues to improve energy density and cycle longevity are delineated. This review outlines potential strategies for optimizing cathode materials to accelerate the practical implementation of SIBs for sustainable energy storage applications. • Compares the advantages and disadvantages of SIB cathodes such as oxides, polyanions, PBAs, and organics. • Investigates critical difficulties like phase instability, air sensitivity, and Na-ion kinetics in SIB cathodes. • Analyzes advancements in doping, surface coatings, and structural modifications. • Identifies research gaps in stability, cycle life, and energy density improvements. • Outlines strategies to optimize SIB cathodes for commercial energy storage use.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials Today EnergySame topicAdvancements in Battery MaterialsFrench-language works237,207