Synergistic Ni‐Co Metal Nodes in a Conjugated MOF‐Modified Separator for High‐Performance Lithium‐Sulfur Batteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Lithium‐sulfur batteries (LSBs) hold great potential as next‐generation energy storage systems due to their high theoretical energy density and relatively low cost. However, their practical application is hindered by issues such as the shuttle phenomenon caused by soluble lithium polysulfides (LiPSs), slow redox reaction rates, and unsatisfactory cycling stability. In this study, novel conjugated metal–organic frameworks, M x M″ 3‐x (HHTP) 2 (M, M″ = Ni 2+ , Co 2+ , Cu 2+ ) is reported, as a functional coating on polypropylene (PP) separators. Leveraging the in‐plane d‐π conjugation, high porosity, and rich redox‐active sites, the M x M' 3‐x (HHTP) 2 ‐modified separators effectively suppress LiPSs’ shuttling, facilitate Li + transport, and accelerate LiPSs’ redox conversion. Among the series, the bimetallic Ni 1.35 Co 1.65 (HHTP) 2 /PP separator demonstrates superior electrochemical performance, owing to the synergistic interaction between Ni and Co metal centers. This synergism results in an optimized pore structure, enhances conductivity, and stronger polysulfide affinity compare to monometallic analogues. Consequently, the cell employing Ni 1.3 5Co 1.65 (HHTP) 2 /PP provides an initial discharge capacity of 1148 mAh g −1 at 0.1 C and the capacity decay rate is 0.08% after 500 cycles at 1C. This work presents a scalable and environmentally friendly strategy for constructing multifunctional separators to fully realize the potential of high‐energy‐density LSBs.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".