Anode Materials for High-Power Lithium-Ion Batteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the rapidly evolving rechargeable battery market, various applications lead to varied property requirements. One area that is emerging as essential is high-power batteries. These are expected to be able to charge and discharge in the order of minutes (slower than supercapacitors but faster than typical Li-ion batteries) and still have a high energy density (orders of magnitude higher than that of supercapacitors but lower than that of high-energy Li-ion batteries). In this space, anodes operating at a safe potential (near 1.5 V versus Li) sacrifice some energy density but enable fast cycling and lead to very safe batteries. In this review, we explore the plethora of materials being considered in the literature as potential high-power anodes. Though Nb-based anodes are prominent due to their recent popularity in the literature, any material classes leading to the appropriate balance of power and energy are discussed. We, in particular, aim to distinguish materials that are suitable only for supercapacitors from those with the potential for practical batteries, distinguished by volumetric energy density. The best materials discussed herein show excellent specific capacities and fast cycling performance, though a greater focus on performance at practical loadings is generally required.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".