« Coronavirus & materials science | Main | How can materials science contribute to fighting against the new coronavirus? »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


How about the reliability of their fitted equations? Does it really make sense to get conclusions by summarizing the published data? How about the reliability of the published data they used? Do you really believe the published batteries data?
I found another review which also published on Acs Nano (ACS Nano 2020, 14, 3, 2628-2658 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsnano.9b08396) holds a different opinions that 2D materials could improve the rate performance of electrodes for batteries.

Tianyu Liu

Thanks Mark for your insightful comment. I remain neutral to the scientific findings of any papers I write about, but believe that your questions are valid. It is not surprising to me that there are papers holding contradictory views of a topic. I believe that it is beneficial to propel the development of science.
I greatly appreciate that you have brought up another informative paper to our readers.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)