Theory of Cation Solvation in the Helmholtz Layer of Li-Ion Battery Electrolytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide The solvation environments of Li + in conventional nonaqueous battery electrolytes, such as LiPF 6 in mixtures of ethylene carbaronate (EC) and ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC), are often used to rationalize transport properties and solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) formation. Solvation environments in the compact electrical double layer (EDL) next to the electrode, also known as the Helmholtz layer, determine (partially) what species can react to form the SEI, with bulk solvation environments often being used as a proxy. Here, we develop and test a theory of cation solvation in the Helmholtz layer of nonaqueous Li-ion battery electrolytes. First, we validate the theory against bulk and diffuse EDL atomistic molecular dynamics (MD) simulations of LiPF 6 EC/EMC mixtures as a function of surface charge, where we find the theory can qualitatively capture the solvation environments. Next, we turn to the Helmholtz layer, where we find the main effect of the solvation structures next to the electrode is an apparent reduction in the number of binding sites between Li + and the solvents, again where we find reasonable agreement with our developed theory. Finally, by solving a simplified version of the theory, we find that the probability of Li + binding to each solvent remains equal to the bulk probability, suggesting that the bulk solvation environments are a reasonable place to start when understanding battery electrolytes. Our developed formalism can be parametrized from bulk MD simulations and used to predict the solvation environments in the Helmholtz layer through reducing the number of available coordination sites, which can be used to determine what could react and form the SEI.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".