Synthesis, sintering and electrical properties of Li1+xGdxZr2-x(PO4)3 solid electrolytes for Li-ion batteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, the electrical characteristics of spark plasma sintered Li1+xMxZr2-x(PO4)3 solid electrolytes, underlining the impacts of gadolinium (Gd) substitution on lithium-ion battery performance in comparison to conventionally sintered samples. The samples with different amounts of Gd (x= 0.1, 0.2, and 0.3) were sintered by both SPS and conventional methods and characterized using advanced techniques, including field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM) for microstructural analysis, X-ray diffraction (XRD) for phase detection, and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) for elemental analysis. A significant improvement in densification and a subsequent reduction in porosity are observed in the SPSed samples, which is the main reason for their enhanced structural integrity. However, this increase in densification is accompanied by a complex relationship in which the presence of Gd may hinder ionic transport compared to conventionally sintered samples. Optimizing the Gd content to balance ionic conductivity and structural stability, which supports the development of solid electrolytes for lithium-ion battery applications, was emphasized.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".