Home Journals Progress in Chemistry
Progress in Chemistry

Abbreviation (ISO4): Prog Chem      Editor in chief: Jincai ZHAO

About  /  Aim & scope  /  Editorial board  /  Indexed  /  Contact  / 
Review

Review on the First-Principles Calculation in Lithium-Sulfur Battery

  • Zhang Xiaofei ,
  • Li Shenhao ,
  • Wang Zhen ,
  • Yan Jian ,
  • Liu Jiaqin , * ,
  • Wu Yucheng , *
Expand
  • Institute of Industry © Equipment Technology, School of Materials Science and Engineering, Key Laboratory of Advanced Functional Materials © Devices of Anhui Province, Hefei University of Technology,Hefei 230009, China
* Corresponding author e-mail: (Jiaqin Liu);
(Yucheng Wu)

Received date: 2022-08-18

  Revised date: 2022-12-19

  Online published: 2023-02-16

Supported by

National Natural Science Foundation of China(51972093)

National Natural Science Foundation of China(U1810204)

National Natural Science Foundation of China(U1910210)

Nature Science Foundation of Anhui Province(2008085ME129)

Key Research and Development Plan of Anhui Province(202004b11020024)

Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China(PA2021GDSK0087)

Abstract

Lithium-sulfur (Li-S) batteries are considered as a promising next-generation high-energy battery system due to their ultrahigh theoretical capacity, energy density and the merits of sulfur in terms of abundant resource and environmental friendliness. However, their practical application is confronted with several critical problems including insulation of sulfur and discharge products, shuttle effect of soluble lithium polysulfides, and sluggish reaction kinetics of sulfur, etc. Significant progress has been achieved in addressing these problems by sulfur electrode design, functional separator/interlayer, liquid-electrolyte modification, and solid-electrolyte strategy. Nevertheless, there is still a lack of in-depth understanding of real-time dynamic reaction process and mechanism as well as electrode/electrolyte interface regulation strategy in Li-S batteries. First-principles calculation has gradually developed into an important research tool in various disciplines such as materials, chemistry and energy, facilitating to understand the properties of reaction species, interactions between molecules or/and electrons, electrochemical reaction processes and laws, and dynamic evolution of electrode/electrolyte from the molecular/atomic level. It delivers distinct advantages beyond “experimental trial and error” method in studying the multi-electron and multi-ion redox process in Li-S battery. In this paper, important advances in the application of first principles calculation to study the interactions between electrodes and polysulfides, charge-discharge reaction mechanisms, and electrolytes in Li-S batteries are comprehensively reviewed, and the current challenge and enlightening directions for application of first-principles calculation to study Li-S batteries are also prospected.

Cite this article

Zhang Xiaofei , Li Shenhao , Wang Zhen , Yan Jian , Liu Jiaqin , Wu Yucheng . Review on the First-Principles Calculation in Lithium-Sulfur Battery[J]. Progress in Chemistry, 2023 , 35(3) : 375 -389 . DOI: 10.7536/PC220819

Contents

1 Introduction
2 Overview of first-principles
3 Interaction between electrode materials and polysulfides
3.1 Carbon materials
3.2 Transition metal compounds
3.3 Heterostructure
3.4 MOF and COF
3.5 Other materials
4 Reaction mechanism during charge and discharge
5 Electrolyte
6 Conclusion and outlook

1 Introduction

Under the background of "double carbon", the energy structure is facing a profound low-carbon transformation, and it is urgent to develop renewable and clean new energy. Energy storage technology is the key technology to build smart grid and realize the popularization and application of renewable energy, and it is also an important means to stabilize the fluctuation of new energy and reduce the impact of large-scale new energy access on the grid[1,2]. In addition, with the rapid development of mobile electronic devices, electric vehicles and smart grids, the energy density of traditional lithium-ion batteries is increasingly approaching its theoretical limit, which can not meet the demand of high energy density energy storage exceeding 400 Wh·kg-1, and the development of new high energy density rechargeable battery technology is urgently needed[3,4].
Lithium-sulfur batteries are considered to be a promising next-generation high-energy battery technology because of their high theoretical specific capacity (1675 mAh·g-1) and energy density (2600 Wh·kg-1) with abundant sulfur reserves, low cost, and environmental friendliness[5]. However, the insulation of active sulfur and its reduction products, the "shuttle effect" of soluble polysulfide (PS), the slow sulfur reaction kinetics, and the poor cycle stability, serious self-discharge and potential safety hazards caused by the dendrite of lithium anode during charge-discharge process have seriously limited the large-scale application of lithium-sulfur batteries[6,7]. In order to solve the above problems, researchers have carried out a lot of fruitful work from different perspectives, such as sulfur cathode design, separator modification, electrolyte modification or solid electrolyte[8~10]. However, there is still a lack of in-depth understanding of the internal electrochemical reaction mechanism of lithium-sulfur batteries and the rational design strategy of electrodes, electrolytes and their interfaces[11].
Theoretical calculations and simulations have been extended to the fields of chemistry, materials and energy, especially the first-principles calculations based on quantum mechanics, which have unique advantages in clarifying reaction mechanisms, providing new material design strategies and predicting their physical properties[12,13]. First-principles calculations have also played an important role in studying and solving the key problems of lithium-sulfur batteries. Through the establishment of the calculation model,Simulate the structure and properties of battery materials from the atomic/electronic scale, reveal the complex reaction process and law inside the battery, characterize the structure and energy information of complex intermediate products, visualize the diffusion and decomposition kinetics of molecules/ions,It is of great significance to reveal the reaction mechanism at the electrode-electrolyte interface, provide effective guidance for the screening and design of battery materials, broaden the knowledge and understanding of lithium-sulfur batteries, and promote their development[14,15]. In this paper, the simulation methods of first-principles calculations are briefly described, and then the important progress in the study of the interaction between electrode materials and polysulfides, the reaction mechanism in the charge-discharge process, and electrolytes for lithium-sulfur batteries based on first-principles calculations is reviewed.Finally, the current challenges and broad prospects of the application of first-principles calculations to lithium-sulfur battery research are prospected.

2 First Principles Overview

The first principle is based on quantum mechanics, according to the principle of interaction between atomic nucleus and electron and its basic law of motion, after approximate treatment, the algorithm of solving Schrodinger equation. The commonly used first-principles calculation methods include Hartree-Fork (HF) self-consistent field method, density functional theory (DFT), quasi-particle (GW) approximation, and ab initio molecular dynamics (AIMD), among which HF, DFT, and AIMD are widely used[16~18].
The HF method was proposed by HARTREE and FOCK in the 1920s and 1930s. It uses Hartree approximation, Fock approximation, LCAO-MO approximation, etc. To simplify the unsolvable many-particle Schrodinger equation into a solvable single-particle Schrodinger equation[19]. The history of DFT can be traced back to the 1920s. In the Thomas-Fermi model established by Thomas and Fermi, the energy of the system is expressed as a function of the electron density. In 1964, Kohn proposed the Hohenberg-Kohn theorem, and in 1965, Kohn and Sham established the Kohn-Sham equation, which clarified the exact relationship between the ground state energy and the electron density[20][21]. Most of the theoretical simulations in the lithium-sulfur battery field are based on DFT calculations without empirical fitting and parameter tuning[22]. The physical and chemical properties of materials can be obtained by calculating the stable configuration and energy of materials, such as calculating the formation energy or migration energy of material defects to predict the phase stability of new materials; The interaction mechanism was determined by calculating the adsorption of polysulfide molecules on the surface of electrode materials. The catalytic activity of electrode materials was evaluated by calculating the reaction free energy change, lithium ion diffusion and Li2S decomposition. AIMD came into being with the development of DFT and HF[23]. Molecules and atoms are always in motion. Molecular dynamics is a computer simulation method based on classical Newtonian mechanics to simulate the micro-dynamic behavior of materials. By solving the motion equations of all particles, the basic processes related to the atomic motion path are simulated in real time. AIMD can be used to study the electrolyte of lithium-sulfur battery, and can also be used to simulate or predict the kinetic process of electrode surface reaction, especially the interfacial reaction between electrode and electrolyte. The structure and properties of electrolyte, ion transport in electrolyte, ion diffusion on the surface of electrode material or at the electrode-electrolyte interface, ionic conductivity, dielectric constant of electrolyte and viscosity are calculated by establishing bulk and interface structure models.

3 Interaction between electrode materials and polysulfide

The insulating properties of active sulfur and its discharge end products, as well as the dissolution shuttle of polysulfide intermediates in the electrolyte, lead to rapid capacity decay and reduced cycle life of the battery. A common solution strategy is to compound sulfur with a conductive support (host) to improve its electron/ion conductivity and to limit that polysulfide ion dissolution shuttle to some extent. The ideal sulfur host material should also have the following characteristics: (1) good adsorption of PS to inhibit PS dissolution shuttle; (2) provide good electron and ion transport to improve reaction kinetics; (3) Catalytically promote the kinetics of PS redox reaction to achieve fast charging and discharging. First-principles calculations were used to explore the interaction between PS and electrode materials, combined with experiments to achieve efficient screening, while guiding the prediction of ideal host materials.

3.1 Carbon material

Carbon materials are widely used as positive electrodes for lithium-sulfur batteries due to their unique advantages such as high conductivity, high specific surface area, and tunable pore size distribution[24,25]. Nazar's group used highly ordered mesoporous carbon material CMK-3 as the active sulfur carrier, and the carbon skeleton not only acted as the active material wrapping layer, but also acted as the micro electrochemical reaction chamber[26]. However, due to the limited physical anchoring ability of non-polar carbon materials to PS, researchers have proposed to modify the surface of carbon materials by adjusting the arrangement of carbon atoms or introducing defects, atom doping and functional groups to make them have adjustable electronic properties and chemical reactivity[27][28~30].
Li et al. Studied and compared the adsorption behavior and migration of lithium polysulfide (LiPS) on the surface of five allotropic monomolecular films of pristine graphene, T-graphene, P-graphene, D-graphene and R-graphyne, and explored the influence of the size and shape of carbon rings on the inhibition of LiPS shuttle effect[27]. The results show that the monolayer with octagonal ring structure has better adsorption performance for S8 cluster and LiPS, and the binding strength of LiPS on different carbon allotropes is mainly determined by the carbon ring structure. The anchoring material which can simultaneously meet the conditions of stable structure, a large number of active sites, moderate adsorption strength, low migration energy barrier, good conductivity and the like is suitable for constructing an ideal positive electrode of a lithium-sulfur battery. Jand et al. Compared the adsorption characteristics of Li2Sx(3,4,5,6,7,8) on pristine and defect (Stone-Wales (SW) and single-vacancy (SV)) graphene surfaces, and the study showed that dispersion interaction (physical adsorption) was dominant, and the adsorption strength of Li2Sx at SW sites was slightly higher than that of pristine graphene, while SV defects led to the formation of Li2Sx-1 due to the strong adsorption of single S atoms in Li2Sx[31]. Therefore, defects do not significantly improve the ability of graphene to capture Li2Sx. Based on the electronic structure analysis, Yi et al. Found that the frontier orbital of Li2S is close to the energy of SV-defect graphene, which can cause strong S-C covalent interaction, so the affinity of SV-defect to Li2S can make it an effective nuclear site[30].
The electronic structure and surface polarity of carbon materials can be fundamentally changed by doping with other elements, and the interfacial interaction between the carbon host and the sulfur-containing guest is enhanced, which is mainly manifested by the strong chemisorption of polysulfides. Hou et al. Studied the interaction between carbon materials doped with different nonmetal atoms and LiPS based on DFT, and proposed that the correlation between adsorption energy and electronegativity of doped elements can be used as a general principle for rational design of doped carbon materials to achieve strong dipole-dipole interaction in the form of volcano diagram (Figure 1A)[28]. As the neighboring elements of C, N and B are most commonly used as doping elements, especially N doping is used to control the intrinsic properties of graphene. By studying the interaction between different N-doped graphene configurations and LiPS, Cheng's group first revealed the mechanism of effective anchoring of N-doped carbon materials to LiPS[32]. Hou, Li, V V Élez, Gong, Sinthika, Yi, etc. Have studied the interaction between N-doped graphene and LiPS through first-principles calculations. The effects of N-doping are manifested in the following four aspects: (1) Compared with graphite nitrogen doping, pyrrole nitrogen and pyridine nitrogen can cause stronger LiPS adsorption due to their lone pair electrons[33][34][35][36][37][38]; (2) The adsorption of LiPS on N-doped carbon is dominated by Li-N interaction; (3) Compared with in-plane doping, the edge N doping is more conducive to the adsorption of LiPS because the lone pair electrons of N are more easily exposed to Li; (4) The co-doping system can enhance the adsorption of LiPS due to the possible synergistic effect between heteroatoms. In addition to non-metallic heteroatoms such as N, O, S, P and B, metal heteroatom doped carbon materials also play an important role in alleviating the shuttle effect[39]. Zhang et al. Studied the interaction mechanism between different M, N co-doped systems MN4@graphene(M=V,Cr,Mn,Fe,Co,Ni and Cu) and LiPS (Figure 1B)[40]. The results of adsorption energy, density of States and differential charge density analysis show that the competition between M-S and N-Li reflects the main difference of the co-doping configuration, and the M-S system has better chemisorption and catalytic properties. In addition, the adsorption energy and the activation energy of Li2S decomposition are the key descriptors for the rational design of electrode materials for lithium-sulfur batteries.
图1 (a) 不同非金属原子掺杂锯齿边缘石墨烯带与Li2S、Li2S4、Li2S8和S8之间的吸附能Eb (eV)以及Li2S4吸附能与掺杂元素电负性之间的关系曲线[28];(b) MN4@graphene表面的LiPS吸附和催化示意图[40]

Fig. 1 (a) The binding energy Eb (eV) of Li2S, Li2S4, Li2S8, and S8 interacting with X-doped graphene nanoribbons with zigzag edge and the Eb with Li2S4 versus electronegativity of dopant elements[28]; (b) The schematic diagram of anchoring and catalyzing LiPS on MN4@graphene[40]

3.2 Transition metal compound

Although carbon materials have excellent conductivity, and the carbon materials after surface modification and modification can chemisorb LiPS to a certain extent and even promote sulfur reduction and Li2S oxidation, the restriction of active sites and the destruction of conjugated structure will reduce the conductivity of materials. Polar metal compounds (oxygen/sulfur/carbon/nitrogen/phosphide, etc.) Are widely used in lithium-sulfur batteries as positive sulfur carriers, positive additives, interlayers and functional separators due to their strong chemisorption on LiPS and good catalytic conversion ability[41~43].

3.2.1 Transition metal oxide

Compared with other metal compounds, metal oxides with exposed O2- can adsorb LiPS more effectively due to their strong polar surface. Tao et al. Compared the electrochemical performance of five non-conductive metal oxides (MgO,Al2O3,CeO2,La2O3 and CaO) modified carbon sheets for lithium-sulfur battery cathode, clarified the mechanism of non-conductive metal oxides to alleviate the shuttle effect and induce the controllable deposition of Li2S, and proposed the selection criteria of metal oxides for lithium-sulfur batteries[44]. The results of experiments combined with DFT calculations show that only MgO/C, La2O3/C and CeO2/C composite nanosheets show high capacity and good cycle stability, and MgO, La2O3 and CeO2 surfaces can strongly adsorb LiPS (Fig. 2a, B) and have low Li diffusion energy barriers (Fig. 2C); Strong adsorption, high specific surface area, and good Li+ diffusion properties were first proposed as comprehensive selection criteria for metal oxides. Based on DFT, our team explored the micro-mechanism of La2O3/C/S electrode to improve the cycle stability and rate performance of lithium-sulfur batteries, and revealed that the synergistic mechanism between La2O3 and nitrogen-doped carbon materials lies in their joint participation in the catalytic conversion of LiPS (Fig. 2d):La2O3).Carbon materials, which are generally considered to have no catalytic effect, play an important role in the catalytic discharge process by twice lithiation-lithium migration and providing a fast migration path for polysulfide dimers, providing new insights into the synergistic effect of rare earth metal oxides and carbon materials at the molecular level[45]. Based on LiPS adsorption, sulfur reduction reaction mechanism and electronic structure analysis, Yang et al. Combined machine learning (ML) technology with DFT calculation to study the process and characteristics of sulfur reduction reaction on the surface of metal atom M-doped Mn-based mullite oxide (SmMnMO).A linear relationship between the Li2S4 adsorption energy and the sulfur reduction overpotential was established, and the key role of the Li2S4 adsorption strength, which is determined by the charge transfer, electronegativity difference, and work function, on the sulfur catalytic reduction performance was clarified[46].
图2 CeO2 (111)、Al2O3 (110)、La2O3 (001)、MgO (100)和CaO (100)表面(a) Li2S和S8的稳定构型,(b) Li2S8的实验和模拟吸附量及(c)不同吸附位置Li+迁移的势能曲线[44];(d) La2O3表面催化Li2S2 → Li2S转化过程的能量曲线[45]

Fig. 2 (a) Optimized geometries of the most stable Li2S and S8, (b) experimental and simulated adsorption amount of Li2S8 and (c) potential energy profiles for Li+ diffusion along different adsorption sites on CeO2 (111), Al2O3 (110), La2O3 (001), MgO (100) and CaO (100) surfaces[44]; (d) the energy profile for the catalytic Li2S2 → Li2S conversion process on La2O3 surface[45]

3.2.2 Transition metal sulfide

Transition metal sulfides (TMSs) are the most frequently reported metal chalcogenides in Li-S batteries. Some metal M (M = Ti, Fe, Co, Ni, Mo, V, Cu, W, etc.) sulfides exhibit half-metal to metal behavior compared to metal oxides, mainly due to the stronger covalency of soft alkaline S2-/ S 2 2 - compared to hard alkaline O2-[41,42]. The introduction of TMSs as reactive active sites in the cathode can not only improve the effective capacity, but also improve the cycle stability and rate performance of the battery[47].
Chen et al. Systematically studied the potential of first-row transition metal sulfides as sulfur cathode host materials[48]. Different from the "Li bond" theory on the surface of doped carbon materials, that is, the doped carbon materials anchor LiPS through Li-X (X is the dopant atom) interaction, the strong adsorption of TMSs on LiPS is mainly contributed by the "S bond" (M-S)[49]. Otherwise, the adsorption energy and the Li+ migration energy barrier are considered as the key descriptors for the rational design of sulfur cathode. Wu et al. Comparatively studied the adsorption behavior of LiPS on a two-dimensional (2D)TiX2(X=S,Se,Te) surface, and the calculation results of adsorption configuration, adsorption energy and charge transfer showed that TiS2 exhibited the best LiPS adsorption effect (strong adsorption capacity and maintaining structural stability) and the lowest energy barrier of Li2S migration, which could accelerate the electrochemical reaction kinetics[50]. Wang et al. Predicted a metallic VS2 surface with moderate LiPS adsorption strength and low energy barrier for Li+ migration[51]. Jayan et al. Elucidated the quantitative mechanism of surface and edge active sites in the adsorption of LiPS on WS2: the charge transfer from LiPS to WS2 is the key factor determining the adsorption strength[52]. Our research team focused on the reaction mechanism of LiPS conversion catalyzed by MoS2-x/rGO/S composite[53]. The calculation results show that the conversion of LiPS on the surface of MoS2 and MoS2-x undergoes three consecutive steps of "lithiation and cracking", and the last step of cracking is the rate-determining step. For the MoS2-x surface, the product Li2S@MoS2-x is thermodynamically more stable, and the energy required for the three-step cleavage is lower than that of the MoS2 surface (Figure 3A, B). The surface of MoS2-x enhances the interaction with small molecules after cleavage due to the increase of charge density of surrounding S atoms caused by S vacancies (Fig. 3C, d), which provides more thermodynamic and kinetic driving force for the catalytic conversion of LiPS.
图3 MoS2 (001)和MoS2-x (001)表面多硫化物转化机制的能量曲线(a, b)和电荷密度图(c, d) [53]

Fig. 3 (a, b) Energy profiles of polysulfide conversion mechanism and (c, d) charge density comparison of MoS2 (001) and MoS2-x (001) surfaces[53]

3.2.3 Transition metal carbonitride

In 2011, Gogotsi and Barsoum et al. Found that MXene materials composed of layered transition metal carbides, nitrides or carbonitrides have high specific surface area, good electronic conductivity and tunable electronic structure, which is a hot topic of theoretical calculation[54]. Most transition metal carbon/nitride compounds are based on metals of group Ⅵ ~ Ⅷ in the periodic table of elements, and the carbon/nitrogen atoms are located in the interstitial positions of the metal lattice[55,56].
The most widely used MXene materials in the field of lithium-sulfur batteries are Ti2C-based and Ti3C2-based MXenes. In addition, Fan, Liu, Zhang, Wang et al. Used electronic structure, lattice parameters, LiPS adsorption strength and catalytic conversion ability or Li migration energy barrier as evaluation criteria, and compared other potential transition metal-based (Cr, V, Ti, Nb, Hf and Zr, etc.) Or different functional groups (-OH, -S, -F, -Cl and -O, etc.) MXene for S positive electrodes except Ti[57,58][59][60][61][62]. Li et al. Explored the interaction between six different transition metal-based M3C2O2(M=Cr,V,Ti,Nb,Hf and Zr) and LiPS, and the electronic structure analysis results showed that the six MXenes adsorbed LiPS mainly through Li — O interaction. In addition, the monotonic negative correlation between the lattice constant and the adsorption energy indicated that the smaller the lattice constant, the stronger the adsorption effect (Fig. 4A)[63]. By calculating LiPS adsorption, catalytic conversion, Li2S decomposition, and Li+ diffusion on different functionalized Ti3C2T2(T=N,O,F,S and Cl) surfaces, Wang et al. Predicted that — O and — S capped Ti3C2T2 are potential S cathode host materials (Fig. 4 B, C)[62].
图4 (a) Li2S8和M3C2O2的差分电荷密度以及吸附能和M3C2O2晶格常数之间的相关性[63];Ti3C2T2表面(b) LiPS的吸附能和(c) Li2S和Li2S6的分解能垒以及Li+迁移能垒[62]

Fig. 4 (a) Differential charge density between Li2S8 and M3C2O2, and the binding energies as a function of the lattice constants of M3C2 O 2 [63]; (b) adsorption energies of LiPS, (c) decomposition barriers of Li2S, Li2S6 and diffusion barriers of Li+ on Ti3C2 T 2 [62]

In order to make new breakthroughs in the screening and design of cathode materials for lithium-sulfur batteries, besides the widely used transition metal oxides, sulfides, carbon/nitrides, 2D selenides, tellurides, phosphides and so on have recently attracted great attention of researchers[50,64]. Zhang's team proposed to use ML to quickly and accurately calculate the adsorption energy of LiPS on the surface of AB2 sulfur host material, and used 2DMatPedia database to quickly screen out 14 new AB2 compounds that can inhibit the shuttle effect[65]. Taking MoSe2 as an example, the group successfully predicted the adsorption energy of Li2S4, Li2S6 and Li2S8 on the surface of MoSe2[66]. The ML prediction is 6 orders of magnitude faster than the traditional DFT calculation, with an error of only 0.1 eV.

3.3 Heterostructure

In order to cope with the challenges of shuttle effect, poor cycle stability and poor conductivity of active sulfur in lithium-sulfur batteries, it is an effective strategy to couple two or more materials with different physical and chemical properties to obtain heterostructures to synergize each other's advantages, such as heterostructures formed by polar transition metal compounds and non-polar carbon materials[67~69].
Yang et al. Combined NbSe2 and C2N by effectively bonding N atoms at the Nb end (Figure 5A), and using C2N with high specific surface area, good thermal stability and electrical conductivity as a carrier is beneficial to the nucleation and growth of NbSe2, while improving the catalytic activity for LiPS by adjusting the surface/interface atomic environment[70]. The DFT results show that C2N@NbSe2 adsorbs LiPS via Li — N and Nb — S interactions, and the adsorption energy is higher than that of independent C2N and NbSe2 (Fig. 5 B, C), which is consistent with the experimental characterization. Song et al. Used electrospinning combined with a heat treatment process to synthesize a double-heterostructure oxo (S/O) tungsten and molybdenum compound modified carbon nanofiber (WX2@NCF‖MoX2@NCF)S cathode, and DFT calculations showed that the WS2 and MoS2 layers cooperated to form Li — S and S — S bonds to achieve chemisorption of LiPS, which provided a prerequisite for its catalytic conversion (Figure 5D)[71]. Nguyen et al. Used an in situ one-step method to synthesize 3D nitrogen-doped carbon nanotube and graphene-skeleton wrapped Co5.47N/Fe3N heterostructure (Co5.47N/Fe3N@N-CNT-G) (Fig. 5e)[72]. The Co5.47N/Fe3N increases the density of States at the Fermi level, and the effective anchoring of the heterogeneous interface to LiPS improves the cycling stability of the battery (Fig. 5F, G). Gao et al. Constructed Sc2CO-MXene/h-BN heterostructure, considered the interaction between Sc2CO plane and h-BN plane and LiPS respectively, and clarified the mechanism of heterostructure to achieve high LiPS conversion and high sulfur utilization: the heterostructure has stronger LiPS adsorption energy, lower Li+ migration and Li2S decomposition energy barrier compared with the independent material[73].
图5 (a) Nb终端和Se终端C2N@NbSe2的优化构型及差分电荷密度图;(b) C2N@NbSe2和NbSe2表面Li2S4吸附构型;(c) LiPS与C2N@NbSe2、NbSe2和C2N表面的吸附能[70];(d) WX2@NCF‖MoX2@NCF表面LiPS的吸附模型和吸附能[71];(e) Co5.47N/Fe3N表面LiPS的转化过程,(f) 吸附可视化实验以及(g) Li2S6吸附能[72]

Fig. 5 (a) Optimized structure of Nb-terminated and Se-terminated C2N@NbSe2 configurations and charge density difference plot; (b) Li2S4-adsorbed structures on the surfaces of C2N@NbSe2 and NbSe2 and (c) the binding energies between LiPS and C2N@NbSe2, NbSe2 and C2N surfaces[70]; (d) the adsorption models and energies of LiPS on the WX2@NCF‖MoX2@NCF[71]; (e) the conversion process of LiPS on Co5.47N/Fe3N, (f) the adsorption visualization test and (g) the Li2S6 binding energy[72]

3.4 MOF and COF

Metal-organic frameworks (MOF) and covalent organic frameworks (COF) are emerging porous organic materials, which have the advantages of large specific surface area, tunable electronic structure, precise distribution of active sites, environmental friendliness and non-toxicity, and are widely used as carriers to construct various functional composites[74~76].
MOFs have a highly controllable porous structure, a large number of open metal sites, and Lewis acid-base interaction sites, which have outstanding advantages in chemically anchoring LiPS. Our research group calculated the adsorption of MOFs (ZIF-8, ZIF-67 and MOF-5) on six kinds of LiPS, and clarified the essential reasons affecting the adsorption effect by comparing the configuration, electronegativity and charge density (Fig. 6). The results showed that the adsorption Li2Sn(1≤n≤8) of MOFs was through Li-N/O interaction, and the order of adsorption energy was MOF-5 > ZIF-8 > ZIF-67[77]. ZIF-8 has a stronger adsorption capacity because the electronegativity of Zn is less than that of Co in ZIF-67, which causes a higher charge density of N atoms in the ligand. MOF-5 enhances the Li — O interaction due to the higher electronegativity of O in the ligand than N in ZIF-8. In addition, MOF-5 provides enough space for Li to bind to O in the ligand. Therefore, MOFs with low electronegativity metal centers, high electronegativity ligand heteroatoms and sufficient ligand framework space have strong anchoring to LiPS. Compared with 3D MOF, 2D MOF with good conductivity and abundant active sites can achieve fast electron transport. Wang et al. Constructed 13 kinds of 2D MOFs (TM = Co, Ni, Cu, and Zn) with N, S, and O-coordinated transition metal (TM) atoms, in which Cu3(HITP)2 with good conductivity is considered to be a bifunctional catalyst that can simultaneously promote S reduction and Li2S oxidative decomposition[78]. In addition, the high theoretical sulfur loading and moderate adsorption energy ensure that it can achieve fast charge and discharge. In addition, the implicit volcano diagram based on the descriptor φ connects the adsorption energy of 2D MOFs with the coordination environment of TM (Fig. 6 B), which provides a theoretical basis for further understanding the electrocatalytic mechanism of 2D MOFs and revealing the structure-activity relationship.
图6 (a) Li2S8@ZIF-8,Li2S8@ZIF-67和Li2S8@MOF-5的吸附分析[77];(b) Cu3(HITP)2催化剂提升锂硫电池性能的机理;(c) 2D MOFs表面吸附能vs描述符φ[78]

Fig. 6 (a) Adsorption analyses of Li2S8@ZIF-8, Li2S8@ZIF-67 and Li2S8@MOF-5[77]; (b) Cu3(HITP)2 as promising electrocatalysts for lithium sulfur battery and (c) binding energy vs the descriptor φ in 2D MOFs[78]

COFs are porous organic polymers composed of lightweight elements, which can be used as trace additives for binders, separators or sulfur cathode host materials due to their advantages of high specific surface area, low density, multiple active functional groups and orderly arranged channels[79,80]. Common COFs contain N, O, B atoms and phenyl groups. Song et al. Constructed two kinds of COFs, COF-PA (containing boroxane group and phenyl group) and COF-PB (containing active pentacyclic group and phenyl group), and explored the interaction mechanism between surface and pore and LiPS[81]. COF-PA exhibited stronger LiPS adsorption than COF-PB. Further analysis of charge density and density of States showed that boroxine and O in the phenyl group mainly contributed to the adsorption. In addition, comparing the interaction between the inner and outer surfaces of the pore and LiPS, the results showed that the exposure of active sites caused by small steric hindrance enhanced the adsorption effect.

3.5 Other material systems

In addition to classical carbon materials, transition metal compounds, heterostructures, MOF and COF, which are widely studied and applied in the field of lithium-sulfur batteries, the study of the interaction between other conductive polymers, small biomolecules, 2D graphene-like materials and LiPS is also crucial for the exploration of new materials and the understanding of electrochemical reaction mechanisms[82,83].
Carbon nitride based materials are a class of graphite analogues with high nitrogen content and porous defects[84,85]. In recent years, the experimentally synthesized or theoretically predicted 2D carbon nitride-based materials such as C2N, C3N4, C4N4, C5N, and C9N4 have also shown excellent electrochemical performance in lithium-sulfur batteries, and overcome the problems of low active site density and uneven doping distribution caused by N-doping[86~92]. Based on the analysis of electronic structure, LiPS adsorption and redox kinetics, Wang et al. Predicted the potential of hexagonal phase (H-C5N) and orthorhombic phase (O-C5N) C5N in lithium-sulfur batteries. The results showed that :O-C5N had the potential to be used as cathode anchoring materials due to the chemical adsorption of LiPS on the surface and jagged edge, and the promotion of S reduction and Li2S oxidation[89]. However, only the edge atoms of H-C5N can adsorb LiPS and catalyze the acceleration of Li2S oxidation. In addition, other 2D elemental materials similar to graphene, such as boron, phosphorus, arsenic, antimony and bismuth, have been widely explored, which usually have stable physical and chemical stability, high electron mobility and good catalytic performance[93~95].
The interaction mechanism between anchoring materials or catalytic materials and LiPS can be studied by calculating and analyzing the adsorption configuration, adsorption energy, S reduction, Li2S oxidation, LiPS(Li+) migration, S loading, electronic structure, etc. The coexistence of "Li bond" and "S bond" is significant for achieving stable polysulfide adsorption and low energy barrier for Li+ migration. In addition, the study of catalytic mechanism is still in its infancy, and researchers still need to explore the microscopic mechanism and clarify the chemical nature of "Li bond" and "S bond" in order to explore ideal electrode materials.

4 Reaction mechanism in charge and discharge process

Spontaneous disproportionation and interconversion in the electrochemical reaction of lithium-sulfur batteries lead to the equilibrium distribution of LiPS with unknown length and charge state, which hinders the test of complex S-S bonds and intermediate products (polysulfide molecules, polysulfide ions, radicals, etc.), and makes it difficult to study the charge-discharge reaction process and mechanism. In order to determine the formation and evolution of reaction intermediates, various nondestructive characterization techniques such as UV/Vis, Raman, X-ray absorption spectroscopy, X-ray diffraction, nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, and high performance liquid chromatography have been widely used[96,97]. For example, Pascal et al. Found that there is an almost linear correlation between the XAS peak area ratio and the chain length of LiPS, but there is a serious overlap of XAS peaks in different LiPS[98]. The first-principles calculation provides a new method for the elucidation of the reaction mechanism and law in the charge-discharge process.
In lithium-sulfur batteries, the discharge end product is Li2S, and the charge end products are orthorhombic (α-S) and monoclinic (β-S) sulfur. Understanding the electronic structure and energy information of the intermediate and end products is helpful for the design and development of new electrode or electrolyte materials. Kim et al. Calculated the concentration and mobility of defects in the discharge end product Li2S based on DFT, and then studied the charge transport mechanism[99]. The results show that the charge transport in the Li2S is mainly through the positively charged lithium vacancy, and the contribution of electron conduction is negligible. Liu et al. Studied the charging mechanism of Li2S based on AIMD, and found that the delithiation process of ultra-small Li2S nanoparticles represented by Li20S10 clusters was an oxidation reaction, but there were reduction and disproportionation reactions locally, and the long-chain LiPS could firmly bind to insoluble S2- with Li atoms as the medium[100]. The role of Li2S2 in the charge-discharge process is controversial because it is difficult to observe. According to Feng et al., Park et al. And Yang et al., Li2S2 as an intermediate is thermodynamically unstable and prone to spontaneous disproportionation to form Li2S and S[101][102][103]. Feng et al. Found that there are multiple crystal structures with similar energy in Li2S2, indicating that they usually appear in the form of mixtures during their formation, which further proves the difficulty of XRD and other crystal structure characterization methods to analyze charge-discharge products[101]. Paolella et al. First discovered the presence of Li2S2 as an unstable transient species using in situ XRD and determined the conditions for its formation: (1) using a nearly saturated 7 M LiTFSI salt in 1,3-dioxolane (DOL)/1,2-dimethoxyethane (DME)[104]; (2) There is high-order LiPS at the end of charge or at the beginning of discharge. This confirms the high sensitivity of the chemical reactions involved in the charge-discharge process to the internal environment. LiPS is an important intermediate product in the charge-discharge process of lithium-sulfur batteries. However, the existing form of LiPS in the electrolyte has not been clearly elucidated. Zhang's group recently revealed for the first time that LiPS exhibits a tendency to strongly bind additional lithium ions and form cationic clusters (such as Li3 S 6 +) in the electrolyte, confirming the existence of cationic LiPS as the main component in the electrolyte of lithium-sulfur batteries, which updates the conventional understanding of lithium-sulfur battery chemistry[105]. Further, structural information such as bond length, orbital, and charge of cationic LiPS as well as the chemical properties of LiPS-Li+ interaction and the solvation structure of cationic LiPS in electrolyte were obtained based on DFT and MD simulations. The effect of LiPS solvation on the charge-discharge process also needs to be fully considered in the theoretical calculation. Liu et al. Analyzed the thermodynamic behavior of LiPS in DOL and DME[106]. Park et al. Employed van der Waals augmented density functional theory (vdW-DF), quasi-particle method (G0W0), and continuum solvation technique to predict the key structural, spectroscopic, electronic, and surface properties of the redox terminal phases α-S, β-S, Li2S, and Li2S2[102].
By analyzing the structure of LiPS, thermal/kinetic behavior, and the energy change before and after the redox reaction, the first-principles calculation was used to study the interconversion process and law of the end products and intermediate products, which provided a theoretical basis for clarifying the charging and discharging mechanism of lithium-sulfur batteries. Wang et al. Studied the Li2Sx(1≤x≤8) cluster structure and discharge reaction mechanism based on AIMD and DFT: for Li2Sx(1≤x≤8)), when X = 1 and 6, the most stable configuration is chain[107]; For X = 2 ~ 5, 7, 8, the most stable configuration is cyclic (Fig. The stability order of 7a);S8 and Li2Sx is Li2S>Li2S2>Li2S3>Li2S4>Li2S5>Li2S6>Li2S7>Li2S8>S8. Assary et al. Calculated the reduction potential of polysulfides and the Gibbs free energy of interconversion of intermediates, proved the existence of polysulfide ions S 2 2 -, S 3 2 -, S 4 2 -, S 3 2 -, and proposed the discharge reaction mechanism of lithium-sulfur batteries based on this (Fig. 7 B)[108]. S reduction is generally considered to be a S8→Li2S8→Li2S6→Li2S4→Li2S3→Li2S2→Li2S process[109]. The actual reaction process is very complex, and there is a deviation from the above reaction sequence. Zhou and Cheng et al. Reported a solid-state lithium-sulfur battery based on quasi-intercalation reaction, in which PVDF-HFP-in-LiFSI was used as a polymer electrolyte for Li-SPAN battery. The residual N, N-dimethylformamide (DMF) in the discharge process enhanced the C — S interaction, thus avoiding the formation of Li2S. The Li4S2-PAN,DFT calculation of the final product also showed that DMF could effectively reduce the reaction energy barrier of the rate-determining step in the discharge process of solid-state SPAN[110]. Our research team explored the reaction mechanism of introducing biological reductant dithiothreitol (DTT) into the middle layer to reduce polysulfide ions, and found that the reaction goes through four steps: DTT deprotonation, S-S bond cleavage, intramolecular proton transfer and cyclization, in which S-S bond cleavage is the rate-determining step[111]. Reduction of long chain polysulfides to short chains involves → S 2 2 - © S 6 2 -, S 6 2 - S 4 2 - © S 2 2 - , S 4 2 - S 2 2 - © S 8 2 -0 and S 2 2 - U →S2-©S2- step. The low charge density S2 and S3 atoms in S 8 2 - favor S2-S3 cleavage,Therefore, the reduction produces S 2 2 - and S 6 2 -, compared with S 3 2 - and S 5 2 -, S 2 2 - and S 6 2 - as well as U S 1 2 - UN are more favorable S 7 2 -. Based on systematic DFT calculations, Zhang's group constructed a novel electrocatalytic model to reveal the chemical mechanism of sulfur reduction reaction in Li-S batteries by taking heteroatom-doped carbon materials as an example[112]. By analyzing the mechanisms of symmetric and asymmetric Li2S4→Li2S reduction, it is demonstrated that the adsorption energy of LiSy·(y=1,2,3) radicals can be used as a key descriptor to predict the activity, reaction path, rate-determining step, and overpotential of electrocatalysts. Researchers usually study the electrochemical reaction mechanism based on the ideal model in vacuum. However, practical factors such as the dielectric constant of the solvent, external magnetic field and electric field also have an important impact on the electrochemical reaction process[113,114][115][116]. According to Cheviri et al., the smaller the dielectric constant of the solvent is, the more favorable it is for the reduction of LiPS and the less favorable it is for the oxidation of LiPS[113]. Velasco et al. Found that solvents with high dielectric constant can reduce the activation energy of Li — S bond cleavage in Li2S[114]. Zhou and Cabot et al. Used cobalt sulfide as a catalyst. Experiments and theoretical calculations showed that the electron spin polarization of Co ions under an external magnetic field could weaken the electron repulsion and enhance the degree of orbital hybridization, thus significantly improving the adsorption strength of LiPS and the reaction kinetics of lithium-sulfur batteries[115].
图7 (a) 基于B3LYP/6-311G (3df)优化的Li2Sx (1≤x≤8)构型和结构参数以及键长信息(Å)[107];(b) 锂硫电池的放电机理[108]

Fig.7 (a) Optimized geometries, structural parameters and the selected bond lengths (Å) of Li2Sx (1≤x≤8) at B3LYP/6-311G (3df) level[107]; (b) discharge mechanism of lithium sulfur batteries[108]

First-principles calculations are also helpful for the prediction of the charge-discharge voltage plateau. In the experimental study, it is generally believed that the first discharge plateau (2.2 – 2.3 V) corresponds to the reduction of elemental S to Li2S4, the second discharge plateau (2.0 – 2.1 V) corresponds to the reduction of Li2S4 to Li2S2/Li2S, and the lowest potential plateau is related to the conversion of Li2S2 to Li2S[107,109]. Based on DFT calculation, Lin et al. Successfully predicted the double-plateau open circuit voltage (OCV) of fully solvated LiPS and the single-plateau OCV of unsolvated LiPS, and correlated the fully solvated, partially solvated and unsolvating LiPS with the C/S positive discharge plateau, respectively, and clarified the mechanism and conditions of the single-plateau discharge curve[117]. Arneson et al. Studied the lithiation reaction of the S8(100) and (001) planes and the delithiation reaction of the Li2S(111) plane based on AIMD, and showed that the intermediate slope region between the two voltage plateaus was caused by the overlap of the two reduction mechanisms due to the local lithium concentration change[109].
The redox process, law and mechanism of polysulfides in lithium-sulfur batteries are very complex, and the experimental study is challenging, and the theoretical calculation is difficult to simulate the complex reaction environment in the battery, so it needs to be clarified by both experimental and computational means.

5 Electrolyte

Electrolyte plays an important role in lithium-sulfur battery, which is responsible for the positive and negative electrodes and transporting Li+, and is one of the key factors affecting the specific capacity and cycle stability[118]. However, many practical problems such as the solubility and (electro) chemical stability of intermediates, the stability of electrolyte, ionic conduction, and the compatibility between electrolyte and electrode remain to be solved. Clarifying the interactions between lithium metal/ion, polysulfide ion, electrode, electrolyte and other systems is beneficial to the screening and design of new electrolytes. Because of the complexity of the electrochemical system, it is difficult for experimental researchers to disassemble the system into individual parts to study the impact on battery performance. First-principles calculations can help researchers explore the independent parts of the battery and its bulk/interface problems. In this chapter, the application of first-principles calculation in lithium-sulfur battery electrolyte is introduced from three aspects of liquid electrolyte, solid electrolyte and electrolyte additive.
The most common problem of liquid electrolyte is its instability. DOL/DME is the most commonly used electrolyte system. The spontaneous decomposition and gassing of organic electrolyte during battery cycling lead to battery capacity fading and safety problems. Chen et al. studied the gassing behavior of DOL/DME, and the calculation results showed that DOL was easy to decompose into ethylene and tended to react with lithium metal, and the most favorable reaction path (Fig. 8A, B) was reaction 1 → reaction 3 → reaction 5 → reaction 7, showing an adsorption-reaction mechanism[119]; DME has good stability. With the increase of DME/DOL ratio, the discharge plateau becomes longer and the discharge capacity increases. In addition, Li is the key to gas evolution, based on which the authors propose that a surface protective film can be plated on the lithium anode to protect the lithium anode. The solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) formed by the reaction of metal Li with the electrolyte affects the battery performance by changing the properties of the electrode. Therefore, the exploration of SEI properties is also a focus of researchers in the battery design process. Kamphaus et al. Reported the process of Li surface reduction of Li2S8 in DME electrolyte passivated by commonly used SEI components (Li2O, Li2CO3, LiF, LiOH, and Li2S),Based on the multiphase interface Li/SEI/Li2S8 and DME model, the reduction of Li2S8 was observed by AIMD[120]. The study shows that LiPS is inevitably reduced even if it is covered by a passivation layer, which proves the passivation effect of important SEI components including Li2S. Camacho-Forero et al. Studied the effect of charged interface on electrolyte decomposition, and found that when the interface was charged, the decomposition degree of Li salt was higher, and determined the reduction mechanism of ether and Li salt solvents: C — O bond cleavage and free radical attack[121]. Han et al compared the oxidation potential of electrolyte molecules in different solvent environments (Li+, lithium salt anion (TFSI-), lithium salt, pyrene), and found that the oxidation potential of isolated electrolyte molecules was beyond the working voltage range of typical lithium-sulfur batteries.Complexation with different solvents changes the oxidation potential :TFSI- decreases the oxidation potential of electrolyte molecules by at least 4.7%,Li+, which is at least 10.4% higher than that of independent molecules[122]. Pyrene has a negligible effect on the oxidation potential, and its oxidation trend is different from that of Li+ and TFSI-.
图8 DOL分解的(a)反应网络和(b)反应路径[119];(c) 可回收NiDME添加剂的LiPS转化循环示意图[131]

Fig.8 (a) Reaction net and (b) reaction pathway of DOL decomposition[119]; (c) schematic of LiPS conversion cycle with recyclable NiDME additive[131]

Compared with organic liquid electrolytes, solid electrolytes can greatly reduce the potential safety hazards of batteries[123]. However, the poor interfacial stability between electrode and solid electrolyte, low ionic conductivity, space charge effect and high interfacial resistance have seriously restricted the development of all-solid-state electrolyte lithium-sulfur batteries[123~125]. Xu et al. Used acidic carbon nanotube paper (ACNTP) to induce in situ polymerization of DOL/DME solution to prepare solid-state electrolyte, and the ACNTP surface — OH and — COOH provided ideal adsorption sites for LiPS, which effectively suppressed the shuttle effect[126]. Low lithium ion conductivity is a common problem of electrolytes for solid-state lithium-ion batteries and lithium-sulfur batteries, and there are few theoretical studies on solid-state electrolytes for lithium-sulfur batteries. Shi et al. Studied four Li+ migration paths on the surface of rare earth solid electrolyte Li3HoBr6, and DFT calculations showed that the four migration paths contributed to the high ionic conductivity together, in which the out-of-plane path was more favorable than the in-plane direct path[127]. Sun et al. Studied the in situ reduction reaction of S8 on the polyethylene oxide (PEO) chain of electrolyte, and determined that the main reduction product was —S4Li based on the energy change of lithiation reaction, and —S4Li significantly promoted the Li+ transport through the interaction with PEO[128]. In addition, the exploration of the interfacial properties (lattice structure, electronic structure, microscopic interaction mechanism, chemical stability, etc.) between cathode Li2S and solid-state electrolyte is also of great significance to improve the performance of all-solid-state electrolyte lithium-sulfur batteries[129,130].
The high cost and low ionic conductivity at room temperature limit the development of solid-state electrolytes at this stage. Organic liquids are still the common choice, and electrolyte additives are also a general strategy to alleviate the shuttle effect and improve the performance of electrolytes. Luo et al. Introduced commercial nickel chloride dimethoxyethane adduct (NiDME) as an electrolyte additive[131]. Because the adsorption energy of NiCl2 to S8 is small (0.27 eV), NiCl2 may be released after charging, and after dissolution, it recombines with DME in the electrolyte to achieve the whole electrochemical catalytic cycle (Figure 8 C). During discharge, the additive can significantly accelerate the conversion of S8 to Li2S and reduce the electrolyte demand. Wu et al. Used DFT method combined with energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy and XPS to study the mechanism of lithium difluorooxalatoborate (LiODFB) as an organic electrolyte additive to improve battery performance[132]. The oxalyldifluoro (oxalato) borate ion (F2B[ox]-) was reduced at 1.6 V to form boroxalate radical (·B[ox]),F-, which was gradually eliminated. Boron oxalate radicals may react with DME and DOL at absolute zero, and the final products can promote the formation of SEI on the lithium anode, which not only alleviates the shuttle effect, but also stabilizes the Li surface.
LiNO3 is often used as an electrolyte additive to protect the Li negative electrode and mitigate redox shuttling and battery self-discharge. Ebadi et al. Calculated the electronic structure of LiNO3 and its possible decomposition products after reduction on the surface of lithium anode (N2,Core-level binding energies (BEs) of N 1s XPS for N2O, LiNO2, Li3N, and Li2N2O2),The effect of LiNO3 was revealed by comparing the experimental values[133]. The results show that the charge transfer between Li (s) and N (or O) (s, p) and the redistribution of valence electron density caused by orbital hybridization may be the main factors affecting the chemical shift of core level BEs, and the BEs are related to the coordination number of N atom.
The internal environment of the battery is more complex in actual use, such as the pollution and impurities caused by the oxidative decomposition reaction of the electrolyte and the multi-phase interface reaction mechanism of the electrode, electrolyte and intermediate products, which need to be further explored.

6 Conclusion and prospect

With the rapid development of computer technology and the continuous progress of theoretical chemistry, first-principles calculation has become a widely used research tool for researchers. In this paper, we review the important research progress of first-principles calculations on the interaction between electrode materials and polysulfides, the reaction mechanism during charge-discharge process, and electrolytes in lithium-sulfur batteries. In the aspect of polysulfide interaction, the ideal electrode materials were screened out by calculating the electronic structure of electrode materials and their surface polysulfide adsorption, catalysis (S reduction and Li2S decomposition), (Li+) migration and other behaviors. In the aspect of charge-discharge mechanism, the key structural, thermodynamic, spectral, electronic and surface properties of the intermediate and final products were calculated, and the charge-discharge voltage platform and electrochemical performance in the experiment were compared to explore the charge-discharge mechanism from the microscopic point of view. In the aspect of electrolyte, the stability of liquid electrolyte, the interfacial properties and ionic conductivity of solid electrolyte, and the exact role of additives are studied, which provides theoretical guidance for the selection and improvement of electrolyte.
Computational simulation based on first principles saves manpower and material resources, which not only speeds up the experimental process of researchers, but also makes it possible to carry out research that is difficult to implement. The application of first-principles calculation in lithium-sulfur batteries is still in the development stage, especially in the aspects of catalytic redox mechanism and solid-state electrolyte. Due to the limitation of current calculation technology, some calculation results can not accurately and clearly explain the experimental phenomena. Researchers can only speculate on the causal relationship based on the correlation between the calculation results and the experimental phenomena. With the development of computer technology and theoretical chemistry, first-principles calculations are expected to solve more basic scientific problems by combining with experiments: (1) the design of sulfur cathode host materials needs to balance their adsorption and catalytic conversion of polysulfides in order to alleviate the shuttle effect and achieve fast charge and discharge; (2) The establishment of descriptors is helpful to understand the interaction between electrode and polysulfide; (3) Complex multi-step, multi-phase, multi-ion and multi-electron redox reactions caused by various sulfur-containing intermediates require deeper theoretical studies on polysulfide molecules, ions and radicals, as well as comprehensive consideration of solvent effects, pores, steric hindrance and other simulation conditions; (4) Screening and design of liquid electrolyte and exploration of key factors affecting stability, as well as in-depth understanding of composition/component optimization, lithium ion migration path and transport mechanism of solid electrolyte materials; (5) The data processing ability of machine learning methods is powerful, and it plays an increasingly important role in lithium-sulfur battery research, including material component screening, new material design, enriching theoretical models, and improving research and development efficiency[134,135]. In addition, data-driven machine learning methods have also shown potential applications in battery condition assessment and service life prediction[136,137].
[1]
Dunn B, Kamath H, Tarascon J M. Science, 2011, 334(6058): 928.

[2]
Larcher D, Tarascon J M. Nat. Chem., 2015, 7(1): 19.

[3]
Bruce P G, Freunberger S A, Hardwick L J, Tarascon J M. Nat. Mater., 2012, 11(1): 19.

[4]
Chen Y, Wang T Y, Tian H J, Su D W, Zhang Q, Wang G X. Adv. Mater., 2021, 33(29): 2003666.

[5]
Chung S H, Manthiram A. Adv. Mater., 2019, 31(27): 1901125.

[6]
Yang Y, Zheng G Y, Cui Y. Chem. Soc. Rev., 2013, 42(7): 3018.

[7]
He J R, Manthiram A. Energy Storage Mater., 2019, 20: 55.

[8]
Huang L, Li J J, Liu B, Li Y H, Shen S H, Deng S J, Lu C W, Zhang W K, Xia Y, Pan G X, Wang X L, Xiong Q Q, Xia X H, Tu J P. Adv. Funct. Mater., 2020, 30(22): 1910375.

[9]
Zhang M, Chen W, Xue L X, Jiao Y, Lei T Y, Chu J W, Huang J W, Gong C H, Yan C Y, Yan Y C, Hu Y, Wang X F, Xiong J. Adv. Energy Mater., 2020, 10(2): 1903008.

[10]
Yang X F, Luo J, Sun X L. Chem. Soc. Rev., 2020, 49(7): 2140.

[11]
Feng S, Fu Z H, Chen X, Zhang Q. InfoMat, 2022, 4(3): e12304.

[12]
Fan Y C, Chen X, Legut D, Zhang Q F. Energy Storage Mater., 2019, 16: 169.

[13]
Meng Y S, Elena Arroyo-de Dompablo M. Energy Environ. Sci., 2009, 2(6): 589.

[14]
Sendek A D, Yang Q, Cubuk E D, Duerloo K A N, Cui Y, Reed E J. Energy Environ. Sci., 2017, 10(1): 306.

[15]
Yao N, Chen X, Fu Z H, Zhang Q. Chem. Rev., 2022, 122(12): 10970.

[16]
Hohenberg P, Kohn W. Phys. Rev., 1964, 136(3B): B864.

[17]
Foulkes W M C, Mitas L, Needs R J, Rajagopal G. Rev. Mod. Phys., 2001, 73(1): 33.

[18]
Geerlings P, De Proft F, Langenaeker W. Chem. Rev., 2003, 103(5): 1793.

[19]
Myers W D, Swiatecki W J. Nucl. Phys. A, 1996, 601(2): 141.

[20]
Görling A. Phys. Rev. A, 1999, 59(5): 3359.

[21]
Städele M, Moukara M, Majewski J A, Vogl P, Görling A. Phys. Rev. B, 1999, 59(15): 10031.

[22]
Islam M S, Fisher C A J. Chem. Soc. Rev., 2014, 43(1): 185.

[23]
Laasonen K. Methods in Molecular Biology. Totowa: Humana Press, 2012. 29.

[24]
Wang M Y, Xia X H, Zhong Y, Wu J B, Xu R C, Yao Z J, Wang D H, Tang W J, Wang X L, Tu J P. Chem. Eur. J., 2019, 25(15): 3710.

[25]
Ye H, Yin Y X, Xin S, Guo Y G. J. Mater. Chem. A, 2013, 1(22): 6602.

[26]
Ji X L, Lee K T, Nazar L F. Nat. Mater., 2009, 8(6): 500.

[27]
Li T T, He C, Zhang W X. J. Energy Chem., 2021, 52: 121.

[28]
Hou T Z, Chen X, Peng H J, Huang J Q, Li B Q, Zhang Q, Li B. Small, 2016, 12(24): 3283.

[29]
Wasalathilake K C, Roknuzzaman M, Ostrikov K K, Ayoko G A, Yan C. RSC Adv., 2018, 8(5): 2271.

[30]
Yi Z L, Su F Y, Huo L, Cui G Y, Zhang C L, Han P D, Dong N, Chen C M. Appl. Surf. Sci., 2020, 503: 144446.

[31]
Jand S P, Chen Y X, Kaghazchi P. J. Power Sources, 2016, 308: 166.

[32]
Yin L C, Liang J, Zhou G M, Li F, Saito R, Cheng H M. Nano Energy, 2016, 25: 203.

[33]
Hou T Z, Peng H J, Huang J Q, Zhang Q, Li B. 2D Mater., 2015, 2(1): 014011.

[34]
Li F, Su Y, Zhao J J. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2016, 18(36): 25241.

[35]
VÉlez P, Laura Para M, Luque G L, Barraco D, Leiva E P M. Electrochimica Acta, 2019, 309: 402.

[36]
Gong B J, Song X D, Shi Y T, Liu J H, Hao C. J. Phys. Chem. C, 2020, 124(6): 3644.

[37]
Sinthika S, Pushpa Selvi M, Nimma Elizabeth R, Gavali D S, Thapa R. Int. J. Energy Res., 2022, 46(4): 4405.

[38]
Yi Z L, Su F Y, Cui G Y, Han P D, Dong N, Chen C M. ChemistrySelect, 2019, 4(43): 12612.

[39]
Cheviri M, Lakshmipathi S. Chem. Phys. Lett., 2020, 739: 136942.

[40]
Zhang L, Liang P, Shu H B, Man X L, Du X Q, Chao D L, Liu Z G, Sun Y P, Wan H Z, Wang H. J. Colloid Interface Sci., 2018, 529: 426.

[41]
Liu X, Huang J Q, Zhang Q, Mai L Q. Adv. Mater., 2017, 29(20): 1601759.

[42]
Balach J, Linnemann J, Jaumann T, Giebeler L. J. Mater. Chem. A, 2018, 6(46): 23127.

[43]
Xu J, Lawson T, Fan H B, Su D W, Wang G X. Adv. Energy Mater., 2018, 8(10): 1702607.

[44]
Tao X Y, Wang J G, Liu C, Wang H T, Yao H B, Zheng G Y, Seh Z W, Cai Q X, Li W Y, Zhou G M, Zu C X, Cui Y. Nat. Commun., 2016, 7: 11203.

[45]
Zhang X F, Chen M S, Zhang Q, Liu J Q, Wu Y C. Appl. Surf. Sci., 2021, 563: 150172.

[46]
Wang L, Hu Z H, Wan X, Hua W X, Li H, Yang Q H, Wang W C. Adv. Energy Mater., 2022, 12(20): 2200340.

[47]
Liu J Q, Li K H, Zhang Q, Zhang X F, Liang X, Yan J, Tan H H, Yu Y, Wu Y C. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 2021, 13(38): 45547.

[48]
Chen X, Peng H J, Zhang R, Hou T Z, Huang J Q, Li B, Zhang Q. ACS Energy Lett., 2017, 2(4): 795.

[49]
Hou T Z, Xu W T, Chen X, Peng H J, Huang J Q, Zhang Q. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 2017, 56(28): 8178.

[50]
Wu Q, Chen Y C, Hao X Q, Zhu T J, Cao Y A, Wang W J. J. Electrochem. Soc., 2021, 168(12): 120516.

[51]
Wang Y S, Ma Z, Song N H, Zhang T J, Zhang Q L, Yang D P, Wang F. Chem. Phys. Lett., 2020, 741: 137121.

[52]
Jayan R, Islam M M. J. Phys. Chem. C, 2020, 124(50): 27323.

[53]
Zhang Q, Zhang X F, Li M, Liu J Q, Wu Y C. Appl. Surf. Sci., 2019, 487: 452.

[54]
Naguib M, Kurtoglu M, Presser V, Lu J, Niu J J, Heon M, Hultman L, Gogotsi Y, Barsoum M W. Adv. Mater., 2011, 23(37): 4248.

[55]
Pang J B, Mendes R G, Bachmatiuk A, Zhao L, Ta H Q, Gemming T, Liu H, Liu Z F, Rummeli M H. Chem. Soc. Rev., 2019, 48(1): 72.

[56]
Xiao Y, Hwang J Y, Sun Y K. J. Mater. Chem. A, 2016, 4(27): 10379.

[57]
Zhao Q, Zhu Q Z, Liu Y, Xu B. Adv. Funct. Mater., 2021, 31(21): 2100457.

[58]
Zhang C J, Cui L F, Abdolhosseinzadeh S, Heier J. InfoMat, 2020, 2(4): 613.

[59]
Fan K, Ying Y R, Luo X, Huang H T. J. Mater. Chem. A, 2021, 10(1): 337.

[60]
Liu X B, Shao X F, Li F, Zhao M W. Appl. Surf. Sci., 2018, 455: 522.

[61]
Zhang Q, Zhang X F, Xiao Y H, Li C, Tan H H, Liu J Q, Wu Y C. ACS Omega, 2020, 5(45): 29272.

[62]
Wang D S, Li F, Lian R Q, Xu J, Kan D X, Liu Y H, Chen G, Gogotsi Y, Wei Y J. ACS Nano, 2019, 13(10): 11078.

[63]
Li N, Meng Q Q, Zhu X H, Li Z, Ma J L, Huang C X, Song J, Fan J. Nanoscale, 2019, 11(17): 8485.

[64]
Song X H, Qu Y Y, Zhao L L, Zhao M W. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 2021, 13(10): 11845.

[65]
Zhang H K, Wang Z L, Cai J F, Wu S C, Li J J. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 2021, 13(45): 53388.

[66]
Zhang H K, Wang Z L, Ren J H, Liu J Y, Li J J. Energy Storage Mater., 2021, 35: 88.

[67]
He J R, Hartmann G, Lee M, Hwang G S, Chen Y F, Manthiram A. Energy Environ. Sci., 2019, 12(1): 344.

[68]
Zhang C Y, He Q, Chu W, Zhao Y. Appl. Surf. Sci., 2020, 534: 147575.

[69]
Mao X T, Yu Y, Zhu L, Fu A P. Chem. Phys., 2021, 548: 111220.

[70]
Yang D W, Liang Z F, Zhang C Q, Biendicho J J, Botifoll M, Spadaro M C, Chen Q L, Li M Y, Ramon A, Moghaddam A O, Llorca J, Wang J A, Morante J R, Arbiol J, Chou S L, Cabot A. Adv. Energy Mater., 2021, 11(36): 2101250.

[71]
Song Y C, Zhou H P, Long X, Xiao J S, Yang J, Wu N N, Chen Z, Li P Y, Chen C, Liao J X, Wu M Q. Chem. Eng. J., 2021, 418: 129388.

[72]
Nguyen T T, Balamurugan J, Go H W, Ngo Q P, Kim N H, Lee J H. Chem. Eng. J., 2022, 427: 131774.

[73]
Gao D Y, Li Y, Guo Z L, Liu Z Y, Guo K, Fang Y, Xue Y M, Huang Y, Tang C C. J. Alloys Compd., 2021, 887: 161273.

[74]
Ye Z Q, Jiang Y, Li L, Wu F, Chen R J. Nano Micro Lett., 2021, 13(1): 203.

[75]
Kong L J, Liu M, Huang H, Xu Y H, Bu X H. Adv. Energy Mater., 2022, 12(4): 2100172.

[76]
Zhang H H, Gu C, Yao M S, Kitagawa S. Adv. Energy Mater., 2022, 12(4): 2270014.

[77]
Li C, Zhang X F, Zhang Q, Xiao Y H, Fu Y Y, Tan H H, Liu J Q, Wu Y C. Comput. Theor. Chem., 2021, 1196: 113110.

[78]
Wang J R, Li F, Liu Z C, Dai Z H, Gao S X, Zhao M W. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 2021, 13(51): 61205.

[79]
Cao Y, Wang M D, Wang H J, Han C Y, Pan F S, Sun J. Adv. Energy Mater., 2022, 12(20): 2200057.

[80]
Zhan X J, Chen Z, Zhang Q C. J. Mater. Chem. A, 2017, 5(28): 14463.

[81]
Song X D, Zhang M R, Yao M, Hao C, Qiu J S. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 2018, 10(50): 43896.

[82]
Schütze Y, de Oliveira Silva R, Ning J Y, Rappich J, Lu Y, Ruiz V G, Bande A, Dzubiella J. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2021, 23(47): 26709.

[83]
Song L H, Zhang M G, Guo J. Chem. Phys. Lett., 2021, 777: 138711.

[84]
Adekoya D, Qian S S, Gu X X, Wen W, Li D S, Ma J M, Zhang S Q. Nano Micro Lett., 2021, 13(1): 13.

[85]
Hao Q, Jia G H, Wei W, Vinu A, Wang Y, Arandiyan H, Ni B J. Nano Res., 2020, 13(1): 18.

[86]
Yamsang N, Sittiwong J, Srifa P, Boekfa B, Sawangphruk M, Maihom T, Limtrakul J. Appl. Surf. Sci., 2021, 565: 150378.

[87]
Lin H, Jin R C, Wang A L, Zhu S G, Li H Z. Ceram. Int., 2019, 45(14): 17996.

[88]
Li T T, He C, Zhang W X. J. Mater. Chem. A, 2019, 7(8): 4134.

[89]
Wang Z H, Zeng Z H, Nong W, Yang Z, Qi C Z, Qiao Z P, Li Y, Wang C X. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2022, 24(1): 180.

[90]
Wang D D, Li H B, Zhang L L, Sun Z H, Han D X, Niu L, Zhao J L. Adv. Theory Simul., 2019, 2(2): 1800165.

[91]
Dong Y N, Xu B, Hu H Y, Yang J S, Li F Y, Gong J, Chen Z F. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2021, 23(23): 12958.

[92]
Liang J, Yin L C, Tang X N, Yang H C, Yan W S, Song L, Cheng H M, Li F. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 2016, 8(38): 25193.

[93]
Jiang H R, Shyy W, Liu M, Ren Y X, Zhao T S. J. Mater. Chem. A, 2018, 6(5): 2107.

[94]
Singh D, Gupta S K, Hussain T, Sonvane Y, Gajjar P N, Ahuja R. Energy Fuels, 2021, 35(10): 9001.

[95]
Zhang Q, Xiao Y H, Fu Y Y, Li C, Zhang X F, Yan J, Liu J Q, Wu Y C. Appl. Surf. Sci., 2020, 512: 145639.

[96]
Zhao E Y, Nie K H, Yu X Q, Hu Y S, Wang F W, Xiao J, Li H, Huang X J. Adv. Funct. Mater., 2018, 28(38): 1707543.

[97]
Tan J, Liu D N, Xu X, Mai L Q. Nanoscale, 2017, 9(48): 19001.

[98]
Pascal T A, Wujcik K H, Velasco-Velez J, Wu C H, Teran A A, Kapilashrami M, Cabana J, Guo J H, Salmeron M, Balsara N, Prendergast D. J. Phys. Chem. Lett., 2014, 5(9): 1547.

[99]
Do-Hoon Kim B S, Lee M S B, Park K Y, Kang K. Chem. Asian J., 2016, 11(8): 1288.

[100]
Liu Z X, Deng H Q, Hu W Y, Gao F, Zhang S G, Balbuena P B, Mukherjee P P. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2018, 20(17): 11713.

[101]
Feng Z M, Kim C, Vijh A, Armand M, Bevan K H, Zaghib K. J. Power Sources, 2014, 272: 518.

[102]
Park H, Koh H S, Siegel D J. J. Phys. Chem. C, 2015, 119(9): 4675.

[103]
Yang G C, Shi S Q, Yang J H, Ma Y M. J. Mater. Chem. A, 2015, 3(16): 8865.

[104]
Paolella A, Zhu W, Marceau H, Kim C S, Feng Z M, Liu D Q, Gagnon C, Trottier J, Abdelbast G, Hovington P, Vijh A, Demopoulos G P, Armand M, Zaghib K. J. Power Sources, 2016, 325: 641.

[105]
Song Y W, Shen L, Yao N, Li X Y, Bi C X, Li Z, Zhou M Y, Zhang X Q, Chen X, Li B Q, Huang J Q, Zhang Q. Chem, 2022, 8(11): 3031.

[106]
Liu Q, Mu D B, Wu B R, Wang L, Gai L, Wu F. RSC Adv., 2017, 7(53): 33373.

[107]
Wang L J, Zhang T R, Yang S Q, Cheng F Y, Liang J, Chen J. J. Energy Chem., 2013, 22(1): 72.

[108]
Assary R S, Curtiss L A, Moore J S. J. Phys. Chem. C, 2014, 118(22): 11545.

[109]
Arneson C, Wawrzyniakowski Z D, Postlewaite J T, Ma Y. J. Phys. Chem. C, 2018, 122(16): 8769.

[110]
Li C, Zhang Q, Sheng J Z, Chen B, Gao R H, Piao Z H, Zhong X W, Han Z Y, Zhu Y F, Wang J L, Zhou G M, Cheng H M. Energy Environ. Sci., 2022, 15(10): 4289.

[111]
Liu J Q, Li M, Zhang X F, Zhang Q, Yan J, Wu Y C. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2019, 21(30): 16435.

[112]
Feng S, Fu Z H, Chen X, Li B Q, Peng H J, Yao N, Shen X, Yu L G, Gao Y C, Zhang R, Zhang Q. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 2022, 61(52): e202211448.

[113]
Cheviri M, Lakshmipathi S. Comput. Theor. Chem., 2021, 1202: 113323.

[114]
Velasco J J, VÉlez P, Zoloff Michoff M E, Visintín A, Versaci D, Bodoardo S, Luque G L, Leiva E P M. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter, 2021, 33(34): 344003.

[115]
Zhang C Y, Zhang C Q, Sun G W, Pan J L, Gong L, Sun G Z, Biendicho J J, Balcells L, Fan X L, Morante J R, Zhou J Y, Cabot A. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 2022, 61(49): e202211570.

[116]
Sun G W, Jin M J, Liu Q Y, Zhang C Y, Pan J L, Wang Y C, Gao X P, Sun G Z, Pan X J, Zhou J Y. Chem. Eng J, 2023, 453: 139752.

[117]
Lin Y X, Zheng J, Wang C S, Qi Y. Nano Energy, 2020, 75: 104915.

[118]
Kaiser M R, Chou S L, Liu H K, Dou S X, Wang C S, Wang J Z. Adv. Mater., 2017, 29(48): 1700449.

[119]
Chen X, Hou T Z, Li B, Yan C, Zhu L, Guan C, Cheng X B, Peng H J, Huang J Q, Zhang Q. Energy Storage Mater., 2017, 8: 194.

[120]
Kamphaus E P, Balbuena P B. J. Power Sources, 2021, 485: 229289.

[121]
Camacho-Forero L E, Balbuena P B. J. Power Sources, 2020, 472: 228449.

[122]
Han J, Balbuena P B. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2018, 20(27): 18811.

[123]
Krauskopf T, Richter F H, Zeier W G, Janek J. Chem. Rev., 2020, 120(15): 7745.

[124]
Phuc N H H, Hikima K, Muto H, Matsuda A. Crit. Rev. Solid State Mater. Sci., 2022, 47(3): 283.

[125]
Umeshbabu E, Zheng B Z, Yang Y. Electrochem. Energy Rev., 2019, 2(2): 199.

[126]
Xu G Y, Kushima A, Yuan J R, Dou H, Xue W J, Zhang X G, Yan X H, Li J. Energy Environ. Sci., 2017, 10(12): 2544.

[127]
Shi X M, Zeng Z C, Sun M Z, Huang B L, Zhang H T, Luo W, Huang Y H, Du Y P, Yan C H. Nano Lett., 2021, 21(21): 9325.

[128]
Sun C G, Wang Z X, Yin L C, Xu S J, Ali Ghazi Z, Shi Y, An B G, Sun Z H, Cheng H M, Li F. Nano Energy, 2020, 75: 104976.

[129]
Zhao Q S, Xue H T, Tang F L, Wei C D. Solid State Ion., 2021, 373: 115797.

[130]
Wei C D, Xue H T, Li Z, Zhao F N, Tang F L. J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., 2022, 55(10): 105305.

[131]
Luo C, Liang X, Sun Y F, Lv W, Sun Y W, Lu Z Y, Hua W X, Yang H T, Wang R C, Yan C L, Li J, Wan Y, Yang Q H. Energy Storage Mater., 2020, 33: 290.

[132]
Wu F, Qian J, Chen R J, Lu J, Li L, Wu H M, Chen J Z, Zhao T, Ye Y S, Amine K. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 2014, 6(17): 15542.

[133]
Ebadi M, Lacey M J, Brandell D, Araujo C M. J. Phys. Chem. C, 2017, 121(42): 23324.

[134]
Wang H, Zhang L F, Han J Q, Weinan E. Comput. Phys. Commun., 2018, 228: 178.

[135]
Lu D H, Wang H, Chen M H, Lin L, Car R, Weinan E, Jia W L, Zhang L F. Comput. Phys. Commun., 2021, 259: 107624.

[136]
Liu X Y, Peng H J, Li B Q, Chen X, Li Z, Huang J Q, Zhang Q. Angewandte Chemie Int. Ed., 2022, 61(48): e202214037.

[137]
Chen X, Liu X Y, Shen X, Zhang Q. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 2021, 60(46): 24354.

Outlines

/