The DOI matches its Crossref record; 188 of the 188 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Status and perspectives of hierarchical porous carbon materials in terms of high‐performance lithium–sulfur batteries
Open accessAbstract
Lithium–sulfur (Li–S) batteries, although a promising candidate of next‐generation energy storage devices, are hindered by some bottlenecks in their roadmap toward commercialization. The key challenges include solving the issues such as low utilization of active materials, poor cyclic stability, poor rate performance, and unsatisfactory Coulombic efficiency due to the inherent poor electrical and ionic conductivity of sulfur and its discharged products (e.g., Li 2 S 2 and Li 2 S), dissolution and migration of polysulfide ions in the electrolyte, unstable solid electrolyte interphase and dendritic growth on anodes, and volume change in both cathodes and anodes. Owing to the high specific surface area, pore volume, low density, good chemical stability, and particularly multimodal pore sizes, hierarchical porous carbon (HPC) materials have received considerable attention for circumventing the above problems in Li–S batteries. Herein, recent progress made in the synthetic methods and deployment of HPC materials for various components including sulfur cathodes, separators and interlayers, and lithium anodes in Li–S batteries is presented and summarized. More importantly, the correlation between the structures (pore volume, specific surface area, degree of pores, and heteroatom‐doping) of HPC and the electrochemical performances of Li–S batteries is elaborated. Finally, a discussion on the challenges and future perspectives associated with HPCs for Li–S batteries is provided.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Sing, K. S. W. (1985) · Pure and Applied Chemistry · doi:10.1351/pac198557040603 · Cited by 24,485
Issues and challenges facing rechargeable lithium batteries
Tarascon, J.-M., & Armand, M. (2001) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35104644 · Cited by 21,130
Armand, M., & Tarascon, J.-M. (2008) · Nature · doi:10.1038/451652a · Cited by 19,612
Materials for electrochemical capacitors
Simon, P., & Gogotsi, Y. (2008) · Nature Materials · doi:10.1038/nmat2297 · Cited by 16,427
Electrical energy storage for the grid: A battery of choices
Dunn, B., Kamath, H., & Tarascon, J.-M. (2011) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1212741 · Cited by 15,072
Challenges for Rechargeable Li Batteries
Goodenough, J. B., & Kim, Y. (2010) · Chemistry of Materials · doi:10.1021/cm901452z · Cited by 10,943
Li-O2 and Li-S batteries with high energy storage
Bruce, P. G., Freunberger, S. A., Hardwick, L. J., & Tarascon, J.-M. (2012) · Nature Materials · doi:10.1038/nmat3191 · Cited by 9,479
A highly ordered nanostructured carbon–sulphur cathode for lithium–sulphur batteries
Ji, X., Lee, K. T., & Nazar, L. F. (2009) · Nature Materials · doi:10.1038/nmat2460 · Cited by 5,988
Electrochemical Energy Storage for Green Grid
Yang, Z., Zhang, J., Kintner-Meyer, M. C. W., Lu, X., Choi, D., Lemmon, J. P., & Liu, J. (2011) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr100290v · Cited by 5,250
Rechargeable Lithium–Sulfur Batteries
Manthiram, A., Fu, Y., Chung, S.-H., Zu, C., & Su, Y.-S. (2014) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr500062v · Cited by 4,665
Metadata
- Authors
- Xiang, Y., Lu, L., Kottapalli, A. G. P., & Pei, Y.
- Venue
- Carbon Energy
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2022-04-25
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 346-398
- ISSN
- 2096-9570 (ISSN-L)
- 2637-9368
- OpenAlex
- W4224505437
- Cited by
- 253
- References
- 188
- FWCI
- 13.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Status and perspectives of hierarchical porous carbon materials in terms of high‐performance lithium–sulfur batteries. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cey2.185
- The paper
- Xiang, Y., Lu, L., Kottapalli, A. G. P., & Pei, Y. (2022). Status and perspectives of hierarchical porous carbon materials in terms of high‐performance lithium–sulfur batteries. Carbon Energy. https://doi.org/10.1002/cey2.185
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.