Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 710

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Phase stability, electrochemical stability and ionic conductivity of the Li10±1MP2X12(M = Ge, Si, Sn, Al or P, and X = O, S or Se) family of superionic conductors

Ong, Shyue Ping, Mo, Yifei, Richards, William Davidson, Miara, Lincoln, Lee, Hyo Sug, Ceder, Gerbrand·2013·Energy Environ. Sci.
DOI 10.1039/c2ee23355j
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We present an investigation of the phase stability, electrochemical stability and Li+ conductivity of the Li10±1MP2X12 (M = Ge, Si, Sn, Al or P, and X = O, S or Se) family of superionic conductors using first principles calculations. The Li10GeP2S12 (LGPS) superionic conductor has the highest Li+ conductivity reported to date, with excellent electrochemical performance demonstrated in a Li-ion rechargeable battery. Our results show that isovalent cation substitutions of Ge4+ have a small effect on the relevant intrinsic properties, with Li10SiP2S12 and Li10SnP2S12 having similar phase stability, electrochemical stability and Li+ conductivity as LGPS. Aliovalent cation substitutions (M = Al or P) with compensating changes in the Li+ concentration also have a small effect on the Li+ conductivity in this structure. Anion substitutions, however, have a much larger effect on these properties. The oxygen-substituted Li10MP2O12 compounds are predicted not to be stable (with equilibrium decomposition energies >90 meV per atom) and have much lower Li+ conductivities than their sulfide counterparts. The selenium-substituted Li10MP2Se12 compounds, on the other hand, show a marginal improvement in conductivity, but at the expense of reduced electrochemical stability. We also studied the effect of lattice parameter changes on the Li+ conductivity and found the same asymmetry in behavior between increases and decreases in the lattice parameters, i.e., decreases in the lattice parameters lower the Li+ conductivity significantly, while increases in the lattice parameters increase the Li+ conductivity only marginally. Based on these results, we conclude that the size of the S2− is near optimal for Li+ conduction in this structural framework.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1039/c2ee23355j

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 710

Metadata

Authors
Ong, S. P., Mo, Y., Richards, W. D., Miara, L., Lee, H. S., & Ceder, G.
Venue
Energy Environ. Sci.
Publisher
Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
Published
2013
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
148-156
ISSN
  • 1754-5692 (ISSN-L)
  • 1754-5706
DOI
10.1039/c2ee23355j
OpenAlex
W2096694960
Cited by
710
References
31
FWCI
11.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

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.