[jartelt]

Also, this statement is very strange:

> Testing by peer-reviewed specialist publication Advanced Functional Materials publication concluded the cells had “outstanding high-rate performance (149 mAh g−1 at 5 A g−1), surpassing all previously reported AIB cathode materials”.

Advanced Functional Materials is just a journal. They do not do third-party testing (unless something really has changed in scientific publishing in that last few years). Just because your paper was accepted for publication doesn't mean you can go around claiming your device performance has been validated by outside investigators. The peer-reviewers for journals just look at the data/figures submitted and make a judgement call on if it looks legit/plausible or if it looks fake/wrong. They don't actually get devices from the authors and test them out in their own labs to verify things...

For third party verification you need to pay outside consultants (e.g. Exponent) to test your devices or need to get a national lab like NREL to test things.