Mechanistic Insights into the Surface Instabilities of TiNb<sub>2</sub>O<sub>7,</sub> a High‐Power Li‐Ion Anode
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 TiNb 2 O 7 (TNO) is a promising Li‐ion battery anode for high‐power applications, such as implantable medical devices and heavy‐duty equipment. Hailed as being safe due to its elevated operating potential near 1.6 V, TNO has long been assumed to be highly stable in the carbonate‐based electrolytes used in Li‐ion batteries. Herein, all mechanisms occurring at the surface of both TNO and Nd‐doped TNO are identified, and both materials in fact show significant gassing. CO 2 is even released at open circuit conditions, demonstrating the poor chemical stability of the material in the electrolyte even prior to battery operation. Such extreme instability is a critical safety concern. In addition, it was found that Ti dissolves from the surface of TNO particles at low voltage (below 1.4 V vs Li), and in fact deposits on the counter electrode. Ti further inside TNO particles then diffuses to the Ti‐poor surface during discharge. Partial carbon‐coating as a mitigating measure has also been tested and found to exacerbate these processes. The findings identify novel reactions occurring within TNO, and clearly highlight the need to stabilize the surfaces of TNO in order to prevent such aggressive deterioration at the surface of the particles.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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