Electrolytomics: A Unified Big Data Approach for Electrolyte Design and Discovery
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Electrolyte discovery is the bottleneck for developing next-generation batteries. For example, lithium metal batteries (LMBs) promise to double the energy density of current Li-ion batteries (LIBs), while next-generation LIBs are desired for operations at extreme temperature conditions and with high voltage cathodes. However, there are no suitable electrolytes to support these battery chemistries. Electrolyte requirements are complex (conductivity, stability, safety), and the chemical design space (salts, solvents, additives, concentration) is practically infinite; hence, discovery is primarily guided through trial and error, which slows the deployment of such next-generation battery chemistries. Inspired by artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled drug discovery, we adapt these machine learning (ML) approaches to electrolyte discovery. We assemble the largest small molecule experimental liquid electrolyte ionic conductivity data set and build highly accurate ML and deep learning models to predict ionic conductivity across a wide range of electrolyte classes. The developed models yield results similar to those of molecular dynamics (MD) simulations and are interpretable without explicit encoding of ionic solvation. While most ML-based approaches target a single property, we build additional models of oxidative stability and Coulombic efficiency and develop a metric called the electrolyte score ( eScore ) to unify the predicted disparate electrolyte properties. Deploying these models on large unlabeled data sets, we discover distinct electrolyte solvents, experimentally validate that the electrolyte is conductive (>1 mS cm –1 ), stable up to 6 V, supports efficient anode-free LMB, and even LIB cycling at extreme temperatures. Our work marks a significant step toward efficient electrolyte design, accelerating the development and deployment of next-generation battery technologies.
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
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.
Cites
Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold
Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Žídek, A., Potapenko, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 · Cited by 43,764 · see citing works
From local explanations to global understanding with explainable AI for trees
Lundberg, S. M., Erion, G., Chen, H., DeGrave, A., Prutkin, J. M., Nair, B., Katz, R., Himmelfarb, J., Bansal, N., & Lee, S.-I. (2020) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-019-0138-9 · Cited by 10,551 · see citing works
MoleculeNet: a benchmark for molecular machine learning
Wu, Z., Ramsundar, B., Feinberg, E. N., Gomes, J., Geniesse, C., Pappu, A. S., Leswing, K., & Pande, V. (2018) · Chemical Science · doi:10.1039/c7sc02664a · Cited by 3,107 · see citing works
Li‐Ion Battery Electrolyte Formulated for Low‐Temperature Applications
Ein‐Eli, Y., Thomas, S. R., Chadha, R., Blakley, T. J., & Koch, V. R. (1997) · Journal of The Electrochemical Society · doi:10.1149/1.1837495 · Cited by 116 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Kumar, R., Vu, M. C., Ma, P., & Amanchukwu, C. V.
- Affiliations
- University of Chicago (US)
- Corresponding author
- Amanchukwu, Chibueze V.
- Venue
- Chemistry of Materials
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2025-04-01
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 2720-2734
- ISSN
- 0897-4756 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5002
- OpenAlex
- W4409077885
- Cited by
- 45
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 33 · 2025: 12
- FWCI
- 9.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Chemistry of Materials (publishedVersion)
- ChemRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- Neubauer Family Foundation
- Division of Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and Transport Systems (CBET-2144454)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Machine Learning in Materials Science
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advanced Battery Materials and Technologies
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advancements in Battery Materials
- Keywords
- electrolyte design, ionic conductivity prediction, lithium metal batteries, lithium-ion batteries, electrolyte solvents, oxidative stability, Coulombic efficiency, deep learning, electrolyte additives, anode-free lithium metal batteries
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