MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413128859 · doi:10.31224/5036

Critical Evaluation of Sudhakar's ESR-Integrated Method for Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling

2025· article· en· W4413128859 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sudhakar Geruganti

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExtraction and Separation Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLithium (medication)Lithium-ion batteryBattery (electricity)IonMaterials scienceReliability engineeringEngineeringChemistryPhysicsPsychologyThermodynamicsPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A cradle-to-gate assessment of Sudhakar’s ESR-integrated recycling reveals 35% lower GHG emissions (2.1 kg CO₂/kg metal) than pyrometallurgy but 12% higher energy intensity (9 vs. 6 kWh/kg Co). While achieving battery-grade Co/Ni (99.2% purity), the method recovers only 68% Li versus 80% in hydrometallurgy. Slag byproduct characterization shows 92% suitability as cement additive (ASTM C989), potentially offsetting disposal costs. System viability hinges on regional factors: ESR is optimal where electricity <$0.055/kWh and Co prices >$18/kg, favoring Quebec and Nordic regions over China or Germany. Description: A cradle-to-gate assessment reveals: Pros: 35% lower CO₂ than pyrometallurgy Direct alloy production for cathode precursors Cons: Li recovery requires supplemental solvent extraction Slag disposal costs ($50/ton in EU) Policy alignment: Meets 2027 EU Battery Regulation’s 90% recycling target for Co/Ni

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.357 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 topicExtraction and Separation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207