149 INVESTIGATING THE NATURE OF LINE BROADENING IN ELECTROCHEMICALLY DELITHIATED Li1.2Mn0.4Ni0.3Co0.1O2
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The anomalous line broadening behaviour exhibited by Li1.2Mn0.4Ni0.3Co0.1O2 during charging to high voltage (> 4.4V) has been investigated. Previous hypotheses attributing the phenomena to stacking faults can not explain all of the broadening features, as some of them (e.g. 003) disobey the selection rules expected of stacking faults in a cubic close-packed system (H-K = 3N ± 1). An alternative explanation has been developed, that describes the broadening in terms of an inhomogeneity of the residual lithium within the crystal structure. The hkl dependence of the broadening has been formulated in a reciprocal space relationship dependant on the c reciprocal space vector, L, and the distribution of lithium in the material δ. It was found that the observed asymmetry can be modelled using the same hkl relationship. The hkl-dependant broadening and asymmetry corrections have been added to Topas script files for structural Rietveld refinements in the R-3m space group. The inhomogeneity approach produced profile fits very similar to those obtained using a model-independent spherical harmonics correction for both broadening and asymmetry. This would suggest that lithium inhomogeneity is the dominant cause of broadening in these samples.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it