Direct Modeling of the Interfacial Resistance in All‐Solid‐State Battery

ABSTRACT Interfacial reconstruction and its associated high resistance govern the performance of all‐solid‐state batteries (ASSBs). However, indirectly inferring interfacial potentials from bulk band alignments masks the true solid–solid electrochemistry, causing orders‐of‐magnitude discrepancies in predicting space‐charge layer (SCL) resistances and impeding interface screening. Herein, by traversing 310 distinct interfaces from ∼29,000 literatures, we develop a non‐empirical numerical procedure that directly maps lithium‑ion redistribution to interfacial resistance by integrating ligand‑field theory with the SCL model. Considering electric potential differences and intrinsic carrier properties during interfacial reconstruction via a modified ligand‐field splitting strength (MLFSS) descriptor yields unprecedented bridging between modeling and measurement, reducing predicted resistance discrepancies from over ten orders of magnitude to within two. On this basis, we resolve the highly system‐dependent controversy over oxide interfacial resistances by identifying extreme MLFSS disparities (>3.5 eV) as the decisive factor, while emphasizing ion‑intercalation sulfides (<0.2 eV) as cathodes for their intrinsic SCL suppression. The predictive capability of this tunable criterion is validated in an all‐sulfide V 0.5 Cr 1.5 S 4 /Li 10 GeP 2 S 12 /75% Li 2 S‐24% P 2 S 5 –1% P 2 O 5 /Li prototype. The resulting ultralow interfacial resistance of 8.8 Ω cm 2 ensures superior cycling stability at an active‐material energy density of 562 Wh kg −1 , establishing a practical paradigm for breaking the energy and kinetics trade‐off in ASSBs.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Advanced Materials
Published
2026-07-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.74207
Primary Topic
Advanced Battery Materials and Technologies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Direct Modeling of the Interfacial Resistance in All‐Solid‐State Battery

Gaozhan Liu, Siqi Shi, Jian‐Fang Wu, Xiayin Yao et al.
Advanced Materials
Advanced Battery Materials and Technologies
article

Direct Modeling of the Interfacial Resistance in All‐Solid‐State Battery

Gaozhan Liu, Siqi Shi, Jian‐Fang Wu, Xiayin Yao, Da Wang, Wei Zhang, Jia Yu, Yaqiao Luo, Bingxu Chen, Maxim Avdeev, Liquan Chen, Xiaobin Yin
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Interfacial reconstruction and its associated high resistance govern the performance of all‐solid‐state batteries (ASSBs). However, indirectly inferring interfacial potentials from bulk band alignments masks the true solid–solid electrochemistry, causing orders‐of‐magnitude discrepancies in predicting space‐charge layer (SCL) resistances and impeding interface screening. Herein, by traversing 310 distinct interfaces from ∼29,000 literatures, we develop a non‐empirical numerical procedure that directly maps lithium‑ion redistribution to interfacial resistance by integrating ligand‑field theory with the SCL model. Considering electric potential differences and intrinsic carrier properties during interfacial reconstruction via a modified ligand‐field splitting strength (MLFSS) descriptor yields unprecedented bridging between modeling and measurement, reducing predicted resistance discrepancies from over ten orders of magnitude to within two. On this basis, we resolve the highly system‐dependent controversy over oxide interfacial resistances by identifying extreme MLFSS disparities (>3.5 eV) as the decisive factor, while emphasizing ion‑intercalation sulfides (<0.2 eV) as cathodes for their intrinsic SCL suppression. The predictive capability of this tunable criterion is validated in an all‐sulfide V 0.5 Cr 1.5 S 4 /Li 10 GeP 2 S 12 /75% Li 2 S‐24% P 2 S 5 –1% P 2 O 5 /Li prototype. The resulting ultralow interfacial resistance of 8.8 Ω cm 2 ensures superior cycling stability at an active‐material energy density of 562 Wh kg −1 , establishing a practical paradigm for breaking the energy and kinetics trade‐off in ASSBs.

Advanced Materials
The University of Sydney (AU), Hunan University (CN), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN), FZU ‒ Institute of Physics of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic (CZ), Shanghai Research Institute of Materials (CN), National Laboratory for Superconductivity (CN), Ningbo Institute of Industrial Technology (CN)
National Natural Science Foundation of China
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Advanced Battery Materials and Technologies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.