MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412347089 · doi:10.71097/ijsat.v16.i3.6244

Challenges and Opportunities for Recycling Electric Vehicle Battery Materials

2025· article· en· W4412347089 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
KISHORE DOOSA -

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal on Science and Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExtraction and Separation Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattery (electricity)Electric vehicleEngineeringAutomotive engineeringBusinessEnvironmental sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

: The urgent need for cost-effective and energy-efficient solutions for recycling end-of-life electric vehicle (EV) batteries is driving increased research and policy discussions. This paper draws from existing literature, original research findings, and ongoing Canadian pilot projects to explore key aspects of EV battery recycling: • Economic and Environmental Motivations: The financial incentives and sustainability advantages of recycling. • Technical and Financial Barriers: Challenges in scaling up recycling efforts, including technological limitations and cost concerns. • Current Recycling Methods: Various approaches under consideration for large-scale implementation. To address these challenges, several policy and strategic initiatives are recommended, such as increased funding for both incremental improvements and breakthrough innovations in recycling technology, financial support for pilot projects that promote collaboration across the recycling value chain, and the implementation of market-driven measures to create a favourable economic and regulatory landscape for large-scale EV battery recycling.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0100.009
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal on Science and TechnologySame topicExtraction and Separation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207