You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Comparative Investigation of 0.5Li2MnO3·0.5LiNi0.5Co0.2Mn0.3O2 Cathode Materials Synthesized by Using Different Lithium Sources
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Chemistry, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fchem.2018.00159 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peng-Bo Wang, Ming-Zeng Luo, Jun-Chao Zheng, Zhen-Jiang He, Hui Tong, Wan-jing Yu |
| Abstract |
Lithium-rich manganese-based cathode materials has been attracted enormous interests as one of the most promising candidates of cathode materials for next-generation lithium ion batteries because of its high theoretic capacity and low cost. In this study, 0.5Li2MnO3·0.5LiNi0.5Co0.2Mn0.3O2 materials are synthesized through a solid-state reaction by using different lithium sources, and the synthesis process and the reaction mechanism are investigated in detail. The morphology, structure, and electrochemical performances of the material synthesized by using LiOH·H2O, Li2CO3, and CH3COOLi·2H2O have been analyzed by using Thermo gravimetric analysis (TGA), X-ray diffraction (XRD), Scanning electron microscope (SEM), Transmission electron microscope (TEM), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), and electrochemical measurements. The 0.5Li2MnO3·0.5LiNi0.5Co0.2Mn0.3O2 material prepared by using LiOH·H2O displays uniform morphology with nano particle and stable layer structure so that it suppresses the first cycle irreversible reaction and structure transfer, and it delivers the best electrochemical performance. The results indicate that LiOH·H2O is the best choice for the synthesis of the 0.5Li2MnO3·0.5LiNi0.5Co0.2Mn0.3O2 material. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 21% |
| Researcher | 3 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 5% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Materials Science | 5 | 26% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 16% |
| Chemical Engineering | 2 | 11% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 June 2022.
All research outputs
#7,309,982
of 23,053,169 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Chemistry
#570
of 6,022 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,202
of 326,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Chemistry
#28
of 163 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,053,169 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,022 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,925 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 163 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.