Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37179618›Full record

ArticleACS omega2023

Exploring the Possibility of Machine Learning for Predicting Ionic Conductivity of Solid-State Electrolytes.

Atul Kumar Mishra, Snehal Rajput, Meera Karamta, Indrajit Mukhopadhyay

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACS omega, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Atul Kumar MishraSolar Research and Development Center, Department of Solar Energy, Pandit Deendayal Energy University, Raisan, Gandhinagar 382007, Gujarat, India.
Snehal RajputDepartment of Computer Science Engineering, School of Technology, Pandit Deendayal Energy University, Raisan, Gandhinagar 382007, Gujarat, India.
Meera KaramtaDepartment of Electrical Engineering, School of Technology, Pandit Deendayal Energy University, Raisan, Gandhinagar 382007, Gujarat, India.
Indrajit MukhopadhyaySolar Research and Development Center, Department of Solar Energy, Pandit Deendayal Energy University, Raisan, Gandhinagar 382007, Gujarat, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3756-6131

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Unlike conventional liquid electrolytes, solid-state electrolytes (SSEs) have gained increased attention in the domain of all-solid-state lithium-ion batteries (ASSBs) due to their safety features, higher energy/power density, better electrochemical stability, and a broader electrochemical window. SSEs, however, face several difficulties, such as poorer ionic conductivity, complicated interfaces, and unstable physical characteristics. Vast research is still needed to find compatible and appropriate SSEs with improved properties for ASSBs. Traditional trial-and-error procedures to find novel and sophisticated SSEs require vast resources and time. Machine learning (ML), which has emerged as an effective and trustworthy tool for screening new functional materials, was recently used to forecast new SSEs for ASSBs. In this study, we developed an ML-based architecture to predict ionic conductivity by utilizing the characteristics of activation energy, operating temperature, lattice parameters, and unit cell volume of various SSEs. Additionally, the feature set can identify distinct patterns in the data set that can be verified using a correlation map. Because they are more reliable, the ensemble-based predictor models can more precisely forecast ionic conductivity. The prediction can be strengthened even further, and the overfitting issue can be resolved by stacking numerous ensemble models. The data set was split into 70:30 ratios to train and test with eight predictor models. The maximum mean-squared error and mean absolute error in training and testing for the random forest regressor (RFR) model were obtained as 0.001 and 0.003, respectively.

Identifiers

PMID37179618
PMCPMC10173313

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.