Multifunctional Carbon Fiber–Nanotube Frameworks for Safe, Recyclable, High‐Performance Lithium‐Ion Batteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This study introduces a multifunctional carbon fiber–carbon nanotube (CFCNT) architecture as a lightweight, thermally stable, and recyclable current collector for lithium‐ion batteries (LIBs). Compatible with both graphite anodes and LiFePO 4 cathodes, the CFCNT platform reduces collector mass to 4.4 mg/cm 2 —substantially lower than conventional copper (10.1 mg/cm 2 ) and aluminum (5.1 mg/cm 2 ) while enhancing electrical conductivity and interfacial stability. Full pouch cells employing CFCNT collectors achieve an initial capacity of 153 mAh/g and retain 126 mAh/g after 150 cycles (0.11% fade per cycle), with > 91% coulombic efficiency. Safety testing reveals minimal thermal response (< 2°C rise) during nail penetration, underscoring robust mechanical and electrochemical resilience. Critically, the architecture enables direct recovery and reuse of electrodes and current collectors, supporting a closed‐loop recycling strategy. These results position CFCNT collectors as a viable pathway toward safer, high‐performance, and circular energy storage technologies.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".