Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 53 references

Magnetic order and Li-diffusion in the 1/3-filled Kagome layers of antiperovskite Lithium-ion battery materials (Li$_2$Fe)SO and (Li$_2$Fe)SeO

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Both (Li2Fe)SO and (Li2Fe)SeO develop long-range antiferromagnetic order below about 50 K, with short-range correlations up to 100 K and lithium-ion hopping at about 0.47 eV activation energy.

desk verdict Solid first experimental map of magnetism and Li dynamics in these antiperovskites, but the 'long-range order' claim overreaches what local probes and bulk susceptibility can prove. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.19603 v1 pith:U4BL2C52 submitted 2025-04-28 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

F. Seewald , T. Schulze , N. Grä{ss}ler , F. L. Carstens , L. Singer , M.A.A. Mohamed , S. Hampel , B. Büchner
show 3 more authors
R. Klingeler H.-H. Klauss H.-J. Grafe
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords antiperovskitelithium-ionbatterycathodeKagomelatticegeometricfrustrationMössbauerspectroscopy7LiNMRantiferromagneticorderlithiumdiffusion
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper sets out to establish the electronic, magnetic, and ionic-transport behavior of two recently discovered lithium-rich antiperovskite battery materials, (Li2Fe)SO and (Li2Fe)SeO, where lithium and iron share the same crystallographic site. Using magnetization, Mössbauer, and 7Li NMR measurements, it argues that both compounds have a metal-like, nearly temperature-independent susceptibility, develop short-range magnetic correlations below about 100 K, and enter a long-range antiferromagnetically ordered state below about 50 K. It also argues that lithium ions begin hopping between lattice sites above roughly 280 K with an activation energy near 0.47 eV. If correct, the study fixes the magnetic ground state of a promising high-capacity cathode family and shows that strong dilution and geometric frustration do not necessarily destroy long-range order.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the 57Fe magnetic hyperfine field used as a local order parameter, measured by Mössbauer spectroscopy (gamma-ray nuclear resonance that senses local magnetic fields). In the cubic antiperovskite ($Pm\bar{3}m$), the 3c site is occupied 2/3 by Li and 1/3 by Fe, forming Kagome planes, i.e., corner-sharing triangular motifs, along the four <111> directions; this is the structural source of frustration. The analysis combines maximum-entropy hyperfine-field distributions with the binomial probability $f_n=\binom{8}{n}(1/3)^n(2/3)^{8-n}$ for finding n iron neighbors, and compares a linear exchange model against the frustrated ansatz $B(n)=B_0\sum_{i=1}^n1/i$, which reproduces the measured field distribution. The same local-probe logic extends to 7Li NMR, where motional narrowing of the linewidth and a standard onset-temperature-to-activation-energy relation convert the hopping onset temperature into $E_a\simeq0.47$ eV.

What would settle it

Perform neutron diffraction on the heat-treated powders below 50 K: if no magnetic Bragg peaks appear while the Mössbauer hyperfine splitting and the susceptibility step remain, the long-range-order claim fails and a frozen disordered state is the correct description.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that in both (Li2Fe)SO and (Li2Fe)SeO the iron moments order antiferromagnetically over long range below about 50 K. The evidence is local and thermodynamic: below 60 K the 57Fe Mössbauer spectra develop a static magnetic hyperfine field whose median value grows as $B_{\rm hyp}=B_0(1-(T/T_C)^\alpha)^\beta$ with $T_C\approx50$ K, and the magnetic specific-heat proxy $\partial(\chi T)/\partial T$ from susceptibility shows a step at the same temperature. Short-range correlations persist up to about 100 K. The authors further claim that iron and lithium are randomly distributed on the shared 3c site; the broad hyperfine-field distribution at 4.2 K matches a binomial neighbor-count model only when the local exchange field saturates with neighbor number as $B(n)=B_0\sum_{i=1}^n 1/i$, which they read as a fingerprint of geometric frustration on the Kagome-type layers. In addition, motional narrowing of the 7Li NMR line above about 280 K is interpreted as thermally activated lithium hopping with $E_a\simeq0.47$ eV.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the static hyperfine fields and the 50 K step in the specific-heat proxy really mark long-range antiferromagnetic order, rather than a frozen spin-glass or cluster-glass state, because no neutron or muon measurement was made to show a periodic magnetic structure.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Below about 50 K both compounds carry a static ordered iron moment, so transport, specific-heat, or electrochemical studies in that range must include an antiferromagnetic contribution whose order parameter follows $B_0(1-(T/T_C)^\alpha)^\beta$.
  • Lithium motion becomes fast enough to narrow the NMR line above roughly 280 K with $E_a\simeq0.47$ eV, so room-temperature battery operation should have mobile lithium, though slower than the earlier computational estimate of 0.32 eV.
  • The random Li/Fe occupation implied by the hyperfine-field distribution puts the 1/3 iron fraction just above the fcc percolation threshold, indicating that long-range magnetic order survives strong dilution in a frustrated lattice.
  • The $1/i$ saturation of the hyperfine field with neighbor count gives a measurable fingerprint of frustrated local exchange that can be sought in other diluted triangular or Kagome magnets.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the long-range-order claim is right, neutron diffraction below 50 K should reveal magnetic Bragg peaks; if instead only diffuse scattering appears, the ground state would be a correlated spin glass or cluster glass, a distinction the present local-probe data cannot settle on their own.
  • The binomial distribution with iron fraction 1/3 predicts that samples with slightly lower iron content, below the roughly 0.31 percolation threshold, should lose long-range order entirely, so a composition series with varied Fe content would be a direct test.
  • The relaxation analysis places the expected BPP maximum of $T_1^{-1}$ near 475 K, just above the measured range; higher-temperature or pulsed-field-gradient NMR could reveal whether lithium moves by continuum diffusion or discrete jumps.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This manuscript reports static magnetization, 57Fe Mössbauer, and 7Li NMR studies of the lithium-rich antiperovskites (Li2Fe)SO and (Li2Fe)SeO. The authors identify a Pauli-paramagnetic-like susceptibility, a transition into a state with static magnetic hyperfine fields below about 50 K, short-range magnetic correlations up to about 100 K, consistency with a random Li/Fe distribution on the shared 3c site, and thermally activated Li hopping above about 200 K with Ea ≈ 0.47 eV. The main evidence is the temperature-dependent Mössbauer hyperfine-field distribution, the FC/ZFC susceptibility splitting, Fisher's specific heat, and NMR linewidth/relaxation data.

Significance. If the long-range antiferromagnetic order claim holds, these compounds are interesting model systems combining geometric frustration, site disorder, semimetallic behavior, and Li-ion mobility; the multi-technique dataset and maximum-entropy analysis are strengths. The paper ships reproducible-looking experimental data and compares two closely related compounds, which adds value. However, the current evidence supports a freezing/ordering of Fe moments but does not uniquely certify long-range spatial magnetic order, and this is the central novelty of the manuscript.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III.B] The sentence 'This order parameter-like increase (see Fig. 8) proves a magnetic phase transition into a magnetically long-range ordered state' overstates what the local-probe data can establish. A static hyperfine field is a local order parameter; combined with FC/ZFC splitting and a broad Fisher specific-heat step, it is also consistent with spin-glass or cluster-glass freezing. The authors themselves acknowledge in Section IV that 'spin-glass behaviour or intriguing order-disorder phenomena' are possible alternatives, and the Fisher specific heat reported in Fig. 3 is broad (from about 30 K to above 100 K) rather than a sharp lambda anomaly. I recommend rewording the claim to 'static magnetic order/freezing' and, if the long-range AFM statement is retained in the abstract, substantiating it with a magnetic structure probe (neutron or muSR) or citing such data.
  2. [Section III.B, Eq. (2) and Fig. 7] The frustrated-exchange model B(n)=B0*Σ(1/i) is introduced as a 'phenomenological ansatz' with a free scaling parameter B0, and its good description of the measured hyperfine-field distribution is used to infer geometric frustration and to support the random Li-Fe distribution. This inference is not unique: sublinear dependence of the local field on n could also arise from disorder in exchange couplings or from a distribution of local environments that is not captured by the linear model. I ask the authors to clearly state that Eq. (2) is an empirical parameterization, not a microscopic derivation, and to avoid presenting the agreement in Fig. 7 as independent evidence for frustration.
  3. [Section III.B / Fig. 8] The order-parameter fit Bmedian = B0*(1-(T/TC)^α)^β is described with shared TC, α, and β and with sample-specific B0, but the fitted value of TC is not reported anywhere in the text, and no goodness-of-fit measure or uncertainty for TC is given. Since the transition temperature around 50 K is a central quantitative claim, the fitted TC (and its error) should be stated explicitly, along with the number of temperatures used in the fit.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section II and III.A] The post-synthesis heat-treatment temperature for (Li2Fe)SeO is stated as 300/500 °C in Methods but 600 °C in Section III.A; please clarify the correct value.
  2. [Section IV] The text says the theoretical percolation threshold on a cubic lattice is about 0.31 and refers to an fcc TM sublattice; please check whether the threshold quoted corresponds to the fcc lattice of the TM sites and reconcile the description of the magnetic sublattice as 'Kagome planes' with 'fcc TM sublattice' in the same discussion.
  3. [Section III.C] The activation energy Ea = 0.47 eV is obtained from the empirical Waugh–Fedin relation with Tonset ≈ 280 K, but no uncertainty or systematic-error discussion is given; given that the same value is used later to estimate τ0 and Tmax, an error estimate would be useful.
  4. [Fig. 8 caption] The shared fit parameters are given as α=2.2(4) and β=0.56(11), but TC is not listed; please state TC and its uncertainty, and define what is plotted as 'Bmedian' given the MEM resolution of 0.5 T.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the central claims are direct measurements, and the modeled distributions are consistency checks with independent external support.

full rationale

The paper's central claims (antiferromagnetic order below 50 K, short-range correlations up to 100 K, Li-ion hopping above about 200 K, and Ea = 0.47 eV) are direct experimental observations or standard NMR calibrations, not outputs derived from the fitted model. The hyperfine-field distribution in Fig. 7 is a forward calculation: it takes the random Li/Fe distribution from Eq. 1 as input, chooses B0 to match the experimental maximum, and compares two phenomenological forms of B(n) against the measured MEM distribution. The conclusion that the data are 'consistent with a random Li-Fe distribution' is a consistency check, and the random distribution itself is independently supported by X-ray PDF studies [15,16] whose author lists do not overlap with the present paper. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The Bmedian(T) fit in Fig. 8 is a phenomenological description of the measured hyperfine field, not a derivation of the transition; the sentence in Sec. III.B that the order-parameter-like increase 'proves' long-range order is an interpretive overstatement about the evidence distinguishing long-range order from spin-glass freezing, which is a correctness risk rather than a circularity. Self-citations ([18]-[20]) concern synthesis, impurity phases, and sample characterization, and they are not load-bearing for the magnetic-order or Li-diffusion claims. No definitional identity, self-citation chain, or fitted-input-called-prediction step forces any of the paper's conclusions.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central quantitative claims (transition temperature, activation energy) are extracted from data using standard experimental fits. The main model-dependent input is the random distribution assumption, which has prior support, and the ad hoc 1/i hyperfine model, whose fitted B0 limits the strength of the comparison.

free parameters (5)
  • B0 (hyperfine-field scaling for B(n) model) = not quoted, chosen to match experimental maximum
    In Eq. (2), B0 multiplies the sum 1/i and is matched to the maximum of the measured hyperfine field distribution (Section III.B, Fig. 7).
  • alpha, beta, TC in order-parameter fit = alpha = 2.2(4), beta = 0.56(11), TC from global fit
    Fit of Bmedian(T) = B0*(1-(T/TC)^alpha)^beta to the Mössbauer data with shared TC, alpha, beta and independent B0 (Section III.B, Fig. 8).
  • B0 saturation values for order parameter = B0 = 26.54(38) T (SO), 25.1(5) T (Se)
    Independent saturation fields for the two compounds in the same fit.
  • NMR linewidth fit parameters = Tinflection = 305 K, Delta nu_rl = 59 kHz, Delta nu_inf = 13 kHz, A = 37±4 K (SO), 30±8 K (Se)
    Fit of Eq. (3) to the linewidth versus temperature in the motional narrowing regime (Section III.C.1).
  • Tonset = about 280 K
    Estimated from the linewidth fit as Tinflection - A/2; used with the Waugh-Fedin relation to obtain E_a = 0.47 eV.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The Li and Fe ions are randomly distributed on the shared 3c site with 1/3 Fe occupancy.
    Used to compute the probability fn in Eq. (1) and to model the hyperfine field distribution and NMR satellite peaks (Section III.B). Supported by cited PDF studies [15,16].
  • domain assumption The empirical Waugh-Fedin relation E_a ≈ 1.67e-3 Tonset (K) eV is valid for these materials.
    Eq. (4) converts the estimated Tonset to the activation energy; this is an empirical correlation from NMR literature, not a direct measurement for these compounds.
  • ad hoc to paper The local magnetic hyperfine field at an Fe nucleus is proportional to the effective exchange field, with the frustrated exchange model B(n) = B0 * sum_{i=1}^n 1/i describing the dependence on neighbor count n.
    The 1/i sum is a phenomenological ansatz introduced to describe the asymmetric hyperfine field distribution (Eq. (2), Fig. 7); no microscopic derivation is given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Magnetic order and Li-diffusion in the 1/3-filled Kagome layers of antiperovskite Lithium-ion battery materials (Li$_2$Fe)SO and (Li$_2$Fe)SeO." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/U4BL2C52

@misc{pith2026250419603,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Magnetic order and Li-diffusion in the 1/3-filled Kagome layers of antiperovskite Lithium-ion battery materials (Li$_2$Fe)SO and (Li$_2$Fe)SeO},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/U4BL2C52}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.19603}
}
abstract

The recently discovered lithium-rich antiperovskites (Li$_2$Fe)SeO and (Li$_2$Fe)SO host lithium and iron ions on the same atomic position which octahedrally coordinates to central oxygens. In a cubic antiperovskite these sites form Kagome planes stacked along the <111> directions which triangular motifs induce high geometric frustration in the diluted magnetic sublattice for antiferromagnetic interactions. Despite their compelling properties as high-capacity Li-ion battery cathode materials, very little is known about the electronic and magnetic properties of lithium-rich antiperovskites. We report static magnetization, M\"ossbauer, and NMR studies on both compounds. Our data reveal a Pauli paramagnetic-like behaviour, a long-range antiferromagnetically ordered ground state below 50 K and a regime of short-range magnetic correlations up to 100 K. Our results are consistent with a random Li-Fe distribution on the shared lattice position. In addition, Li-hopping is observed above 200 K with an activation energy of E$_a$ = 0.47 eV. Overall, our data elucidate static magnetism in a disordered magnetically frustrated and presumably semimetallic system with thermally induced ion diffusion dynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.19603 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Schematics of the crystallographic unit cell of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Fisher’s specific heat [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Static magnetic susceptibility ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. M¨ossbauer spectra of (Li [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. M¨ossbauer spectrum of (Li [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. M¨ossbauer spectrum of (Li [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Temperature dependence of the median magnetic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_8.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. (black lines) Measured magnetic hyperfine field prob [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. (Color online) The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. (Color online) (a) FWHM linewidth of the NMR [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. (Color online) (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. (Color online) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    This observation corresponds to the minimum in Fisher’s specific heat which indicates an anomaly in the magnetic entropy changes at 65 K (see Fig

    For the sulfur sampleBmedian hyp tends to 0 between 55 K and 60 K. This observation corresponds to the minimum in Fisher’s specific heat which indicates an anomaly in the magnetic entropy changes at 65 K (see Fig. 3). Such a feature above TC is absent in the Fisher specific heat of (Li 2Fe)SeO. As depicted in fig. 5 (upper panel) a small fraction of iron ...

    arXiv

  2. [2]

    9 for temperatures between 50 and 405 K

    Analysis of NMR spectra 7Li NMR spectra of polycrystalline (Li 2Fe)SO and (Li2Fe)SeO are shown in Fig. 9 for temperatures between 50 and 405 K. The spectra exhibit up to 6 separated peaks at high temperatures, which are depicted in detail for both compounds at 375 K and 200 K in Fig. S1 in the Appendix. The peaks broaden and overlap when decreas- ing the ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    In this temperature range the NMR linewidth reflects the static distribution of local fields, and the nuclear spins start to de-phase in these local fields over time

    Spin-spin relaxation In Li ion battery materials, in the slow motion regime, where ωLτc > 1 with ωL and τc being the nuclear Lar- mor frequency and the Li diffusion rate, respectively, the spin-spin relaxation rate T−1 2 typically follows the tem- perature dependence of the linewidth [27, 35]. In this temperature range the NMR linewidth reflects the stati...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Mixed Ionic Electronic Trans- port

    Spin-lattice relaxation The spin-lattice relaxation rate 1 /T1 is determined by the magnetic hyperfine field amplitude oscillating with the nuclear Larmor frequency ωL. In (Li 2Fe)SO and (Li2Fe)SeO this amplitude is due to electronic spins of the nearest neighbor Fe sites. 1 /T1 measures the imagi- nary part of the dynamical spin susceptibility χ′′ of the...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Manthiram, A reflection on lithium-ion battery cath- ode chemistry, Nat

    A. Manthiram, A reflection on lithium-ion battery cath- ode chemistry, Nat. Commun. 11, 1550 (2020)

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    J. Du, Q. Li, J. Chai, L. Jiang, Q. Zhang, N. Han, W. Zhang, and B. Tang, Review of metal oxides as an- ode materials for lithium-ion batteries, Dalton Trans. 51, 9584 (2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Zheng, B

    J. Zheng, B. Perry, and Y. Wu, Antiperowskite superi- onic conductors: A critical review, ACS Materials 1, 92 (2021)

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    K. T. Lai, I. Antonyshyn, Y. Prots, and M. Valldor, Anti- Perovskite Li-Battery Cathode Materials, Journal of the American Chemical Society 139, 9645 (2017)

    work page 2017

Show all 53 references
  1. [9]

    Lu and F

    Z. Lu and F. Ciucci, Anti-perovskite cathodes for lithium batteries, Journal of Materials Chemistry A 6, 5185 (2018)

    2018

  2. [10]

    Z. Deng, D. Ni, D. Chen, Y. Bian, S. Li, Z. Wang, and Y. Zhao, Anti–perovskite materials for energy storage batteries, InfoMat (2021)

    2021

  3. [11]

    Wang and J

    C. Wang and J. Hong, Ionic/electronic conducting char- acteristics of lifepo4 cathode materials: The determining factors for high rate performance, Electrochemical and Solid-State Letters 10, A65 (2007)

    2007

  4. [12]

    Malik, D

    R. Malik, D. Burch, M. Bazant, and G. Ceder, Particle size dependence of the ionic diffusivity, Nano Letters 10, 4123 (2010), pMID: 20795627

    2010

  5. [13]

    Reynaud, J

    M. Reynaud, J. Serrano-Sevillano, and M. Casas- Cabanas, Imperfect battery materials: A closer look at the role of defects in electrochemical performance, Chem- istry of Materials 35, 3345 (2023)

    2023

  6. [14]

    Rudisch, H.-J

    C. Rudisch, H.-J. Grafe, J. Geck, S. Partzsch, M. v. Zim- mermann, N. Wizent, R. Klingeler, and B. B¨ uchner, Cou- pling of li motion and structural distortions in olivine limnpo4 from 7li and 31p nmr, Phys. Rev. B 88, 054303 (2013)

    2013

  7. [15]

    Werner, C

    J. Werner, C. Neef, C. Koo, S. Zvyagin, A. Ponomaryov, and R. Klingeler, Antisite disorder in the battery mate- rial lifepo 4, Phys. Rev. Mater. 4, 115403 (2020)

    2020

  8. [16]

    Ranaut, J

    D. Ranaut, J. Kumar, and K. Mukherjee, Anti-site dis- 12 order driven short-range order and canted antiferromag- netism in inverse spinel linivo4, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 578, 170833 (2023)

    2023

  9. [17]

    Goonetilleke, B

    D. Goonetilleke, B. Schwarz, H. Li, F. Fauth, E. Suard, S. Mangold, S. Indris, T. Brezesinski, M. Bianchini, and D. Weber, Stoichiometry matters: correlation between antisite defects, microstructure and magnetic behavior in the cathode material li1-zni1+zo2, J. Mater. Chem. A ...

    2023

  10. [18]

    Z. Zeng, H. Lei, X. Lu, C. Zhu, Y. Wen, J. Zhu, X. Ji, W. Sun, Y. Yang, and P. Ge, Li-fe anti-sites defects in lifepo4: Mechanism, characterization and cathode- regeneration applications, Energy Storage Materials 74, 103947 (2025)

    2025

  11. [19]

    S. W. Coles, V. Falkowski, H. S. Geddes, G. E. P´ erez, S. G. Booth, A. G. Squires, C. O’Rourke, K. McColl, A. L. Goodwin, S. A. Cussen, S. J. Clarke, M. S. Islam, and B. J. Morgan, Anion-polarisation-directed short- range-order in antiperovskite li2feso, J. Mater. Chem. A 11,...

    2023

  12. [20]

    Z. Deng, D. Chen, M. Ou, Y. Zhang, J. Xu, D. Ni, Z. Ji, J. Han, Y. Sun, S. Li, C. Ouyang, and Z. Wang, Cation disordered anti-perovskite cathode materials with enhanced lithium diffusion and suppressed phase transi- tion, Advanced Energy Materials 13, 2300695 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    Harish K

    H. Harish K. Singh, I. Samathrakis, N. Fortunato, J. Ze- men, C. Shen, O. Gutfleisch, and H. Zhang, Multifunc- tional antiperovskites driven by strong magnetostruc- tural coupling, NPJ Comp.Mat. 7, 28 (2021)

    2021

  14. [22]

    M. A. A. Mohamed, H. A. A. Saadallah, I. G. Gonzalez- Martinez, M. Hantusch, M. Valldor, B. B¨ uchner, S. Ham- pel, and N. Gr¨ aßler, Mechanochemical synthesis of li-rich (li2fe)so cathode for li-ion batteries, Green Chem. 25, 3878 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    Singer, B

    L. Singer, B. Dong, M. A. A. Mohamed, F. L. Carstens, S. Hampel, N. Gr¨ aßler, and R. Klingeler, Separating cationic and anionic redox activity in the lithium-rich antiperovskite (li2fe)so, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 16, 40873 (2024)

    2024

  16. [24]

    Singer, M

    L. Singer, M. A. A. Mohamed, H. Hahn, I. G. Gonzalez- Martinez, M. Hantusch, K. Wenelska, E. Mijowska, B. B¨ uchner, S. Hampel, N. Gr¨ aßler, and R. Klingeler, Elucidating the electrochemical reaction mechanism of lithium-rich antiperovskite cathodes for lithium-ion bat- terie...

    2023

  17. [25]

    Kamusella and H.-H

    S. Kamusella and H.-H. Klauss, Moessfit. A free M¨ ossbauer fitting program, Hyperfine Interactions237, 82 (2016)

    2016

  18. [26]

    Mikhailova, L

    D. Mikhailova, L. Giebeler, S. Maletti, S. Oswald, A. Sarapulova, S. Indris, Z. Hu, J. Bednarcik, and M. Valldor, Operando studies of antiperovskite lithium battery cathode material (li2fe)so, ACS Applied Energy Materials 1, 6593 (2018)

    2018

  19. [27]

    M. E. Fisher, Relation between the specific heat and susceptibility of an antiferromagnet, The Philosophical Magazine: A Journal of Theoretical Experimental and Applied Physics 7, 1731 (1962)

    1962

  20. [28]

    Spachmann, P

    S. Spachmann, P. Berdonosov, M. Markina, A. Vasiliev, and R. Klingeler, Linear magnetoelastic coupling and magnetic phase diagrams of the buckled-kagom´ e antifer- romagnet cu3bi(seo3)2o2cl, Scientific Reports 12, 9789 (2022)

    2022

  21. [29]

    Scheuermann, E

    R. Scheuermann, E. Roduner, G. Engelhardt, H.-H. Klauss, and D. Herlach, Antiferromagnetic ordering of magnetic moments due to cavity trapped electrons in sodium electrosodalite: A zero-field µSR study, Phys. Rev. B 66, 144429 (2002)

    2002

  22. [30]

    G. Lang, J. Bobroff, H. Alloul, P. Mendels, N. Blanchard, and G. Collin, Evidence of a single nonmagnetic co 3+ state in the na 1coo2 cobaltate, Phys. Rev. B 72, 094404 (2005)

    2005

  23. [31]

    S.-H. Baek, L. M. Reinold, M. Graczyk-Zajac, R. Riedel, F. Hammerath, B. B¨ uchner, and H.-J. Grafe, Lithium dynamics in carbon-rich polymer-derived sicn ceramics probed by nuclear magnetic resonance, Journal of Power Sources 253, 342 (2014)

    2014

  24. [32]

    Nakamura, H

    K. Nakamura, H. Ohno, K. Okamura, Y. Michihiro, T. Moriga, I. Nakabayashi, and T. Kanashiro, 7li nmr study on li+ ionic diffusion and phase transition in lix- coo2, Solid State Ionics 177, 821 (2006)

    2006

  25. [33]

    A. Kuhn, P. Sreeraj, R. P¨ ottgen, H.-D. Wiemh¨ ofer, M. Wilkening, and P. Heitjans, Li ion diffusion in the anode material li12si7: Ultrafast quasi-1d diffusion and two distinct fast 3d jump processes separately revealed by 7li nmr relaxometry, Journal of the American Chem- i...

    2011

  26. [34]

    J. S. Waugh and E. I. Fedin, Relaxation effects in nuclear magnetic resonance, Soviet Physics - Solid State 4, 1633 (1963)

    1963

  27. [35]

    Nakamura, H

    K. Nakamura, H. Ohno, K. Okamura, Y. Michihiro, I. Nakabayashi, and T. Kanashiro, On the diffusion of li+ defects in licoo2 and linio2, Solid State Ionics 135, 143 (2000), proceedings of the 12th International Confer- ence on Solid State

    2000

  28. [36]

    V. W. J. Verhoeven, I. M. de Schepper, G. Nachtegaal, A. P. M. Kentgens, E. M. Kelder, J. Schoonman, and F. M. Mulder, Lithium dynamics in limn 2O4 probed di- rectly by two-dimensional 7Li nmr, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 4314 (2001)

    2001

  29. [37]

    Pecher, J

    O. Pecher, J. Carretero-Gonz´ alez, K. J. Griffith, and C. P. Grey, Materials’ methods: Nmr in battery research, Chemistry of Materials 29, 213 (2017)

    2017

  30. [38]

    C. Neef, A. Reiser, E. Thauer, and R. Klingeler, Anisotropic ionic conductivity of limn1−xfexpo4 (0≤x≤

  31. [39]

    single crystals, Solid State Ionics 346, 115197 (2020)

    2020

  32. [40]

    Heitjans and J

    P. Heitjans and J. K¨ arger,Diffusion in condensed matter: methods, materials, models (Springer Science & Business Media, 2006)

    2006

  33. [41]

    Lombardi, M

    A. Lombardi, M. Mali, J. Roos, and D. Brinkmann, Hyperfine fields at the ba site in the antiferromagnet yba2cu3o6.05, Phys. Rev. B 53, 14268 (1996)

    1996

  34. [42]

    Str¨ assle, B

    S. Str¨ assle, B. Graneli, M. Mali, J. Roos, and H. Keller, Absence of orbital currents in superconducting yba2cu4o8 using a zeeman-perturbed nuclear-quadrupole-resonance technique, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 097003 (2011)

    2011

  35. [43]

    Bougamha, S

    F. Bougamha, S. Selter, Y. Shemerliuk, S. Aswartham, A. Benali, B. B¨ uchner, H.-J. Grafe, and A. P. Dioguardi, 31P nmr investigation of quasi-two-dimensional magnetic correlations in T2p2s6 (t=mn, ni), Phys. Rev. B 105, 024410 (2022)

    2022

  36. [44]

    Bloembergen, E

    N. Bloembergen, E. M. Purcell, and R. V. Pound, Relax- ation effects in nuclear magnetic resonance absorption, Phys. Rev. 73, 679 (1948)

    1948

  37. [45]

    li7la3zr2o12

    H. Buschmann, J. D¨ olle, S. Berendts, A. Kuhn, P. Bot- tke, M. Wilkening, P. Heitjans, A. Senyshyn, H. Ehren- berg, A. Lotnyk, V. Duppel, L. Kienle, and J. Janek, Structure and dynamics of the fast lithium ion conduc- 13 tor “li7la3zr2o12”, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 13, 19378 (2011)

    2011

  38. [46]

    D. C. Johnston, Stretched exponential relaxation arising from a continuous sum of exponential decays, Phys. Rev. B 74, 184430 (2006)

    2006

  39. [47]

    J. L. Bocquet, Percolative diffusion of a dumbbell inter- stitial defect on a fcc lattice: Calculation of a percolation threshold with use of a series method, Phys. Rev. B 50, 16386 (1994)

    1994

  40. [48]

    Villain, Insulating spin glasses, Z Physik B 33, 31 (1979)

    J. Villain, Insulating spin glasses, Z Physik B 33, 31 (1979)

    1979

  41. [49]

    Marinari, V

    E. Marinari, V. Mart´ ın-Mayor, and A. Pagnani, Spin- glass ordering in diluted magnetic semiconductors: A monte carlo study, Phys. Rev. B 62, 4999 (2000)

    2000

  42. [50]

    A. D. Beath and D. H. Ryan, Phase diagrams of site- frustrated heisenberg models on simple cubic, bcc, and fcc lattices, Physical Review B 73, 214445 (2006)

    2006

  43. [51]

    Jiang, B.-H

    B. Jiang, B.-H. O, and J. T. Markert, Electronic, steric, and dilution effects on the magnetic properties of sm2−x mxcuo4−y (m=ce, y, la, and sr): Implications for magnetic pair breaking, Phys. Rev. B 45, 2311 (1992)

    1992

  44. [52]

    H¨ ucker, V

    M. H¨ ucker, V. Kataev, J. Pommer, J. Harraß, A. Hosni, C. Pflitsch, R. Gross, and B. B¨ uchner, Mobility of holes and suppression of antiferromagnetic order in la2−xsrxcuo4, Phys. Rev. B 59, R725 (1999)

    1999

  45. [53]

    Yasuda, S

    C. Yasuda, S. Todo, M. Matsumoto, and H. Takayama, Site-dilution-induced antiferromagnetic long-range order in a two-dimensional spin-gapped heisenberg antiferro- magnet, Phys. Rev. B 64, 092405 (2001). V. APPENDIX A. Detail of the NMR spectra 3 3.03 3.13 3.23 3.332.93 3.03 3....

    2001

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.