Pan Duan, Wenlei Dai, Zixuan Wang, Ming Chen, Liang Niu, Taizheng Wu, Liang Zeng, and Guang Feng · Batteries & Supercaps · 2024
Review how reaction conditions govern conductive MOF crystallinity, morphology, size and topology, then summarise their electrochemical-energy-storage uses in supercapacitors and batteries.
The review’s argument is preserved as a navigable set of section summaries.
Compiles secondary conductivity, surface area, pore-size and band-gap values for 3D c-MOFs, useful for contextualising the conductivity-porosity compromise.
Relevance: Core · 12 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors · Table 1
Compiles secondary battery benchmarks across Li-ion, Li-S, Li-O2, Na-ion, K-ion, Zn-ion and Zn-air systems, distinguishing roles such as cathode, anode and separator.
Relevance: Supporting · 15 · 3.2. c-MOFs in Batteries · Table 2
Summarises c-MOF uses in supercapacitors and batteries, including EDLC charging mechanisms, 3D c-MOF conductivity/porosity tradeoffs, and battery roles as electrodes, separators, hosts and catalysts.
Relevance: Core · 9 · 3. Application of c-MOFs in electrochemical energy storage
Frames c-MOFs as crystalline, conductive electrode candidates whose energy-storage value depends on surface area, crystallinity, porosity and conductivity, while noting unresolved conduction mechanisms and synthesis challenges.
Relevance: Core · 2 · 1. Introduction
Lists bottlenecks in crystallisation understanding, low crystallinity/activation, scarcity and uncertain mechanisms of 3D c-MOFs, modelling/ML needs, and high linker cost.
Relevance: Core · 16 · 4. Summary and outlook
Organises synthesis control around temperature, solvent, metal salts, additives, reaction time, heating route, oxygen and activation, emphasising how these variables affect topology, morphology, size and crystallinity.
Relevance: Core · 3 · 2. The influence of reaction conditions
Classification systems are attributed to this review and are not treated as a global material registry.
Additives are classified by function, with modulators further split by deprotonation and coordination modulation.
Categories: modulators · surfactants · hard templates
5 · 2.4. Additives
The application discussion first divides c-MOF energy-storage use into supercapacitors and batteries, then subdivides battery chemistries.
Categories: supercapacitors · lithium-ion batteries · lithium-sulfur batteries · lithium-oxygen batteries · sodium-ion batteries · potassium-ion batteries · zinc-ion batteries
9 · 3. Application of c-MOFs in electrochemical energy storage
Table 2 and the battery discussion organise c-MOFs by component role and battery chemistry rather than by a single universal mechanism.
Categories: cathode · anode · separator or interlayer · sulfur host · bifunctional catalyst
15 · 3.2. c-MOFs in Batteries · Table 2
The review contrasts mature 2D supercapacitor examples with emerging 3D c-MOFs, noting that 3D systems promise higher surface area and ion-transport channels but are scarce and mechanism-limited.
Categories: 2D stacked structures · 3D c-MOFs with 1D pores · 3D c-MOFs with 3D pore networks
11 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors
Heating routes are treated as synthesis variables that affect crystallinity, size, morphology and metal-ion supply.
Categories: traditional conductive heating · microwave heating · ultrasound heating · electrochemical synthesis
7 · 2.6. Heating methods
The review separates pH/deprotonation control from competitive or altered coordination at metal/linker sites.
Categories: deprotonation modulation · coordination modulation
5 · 2.4. Additives
The review explicitly structures synthesis control around variables that govern topology, morphology, size and crystallinity.
Categories: temperature · solvents · additives · reaction time · heating methods · metal salts · oxygen · activation methods
3 · 2. The influence of reaction conditions
The review uses a QM/MM study to frame c-MOF supercapacitor charging as a competition between counterion insertion and co-ion removal, with cations highlighted as main charge carriers in the examined systems.
Categories: counterion insertion · co-ion removal
11 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors · Figure 5
Review-defined families retain their representative materials and conduction descriptions.
Emerging 3D c-MOFs that attempt to combine electronic conductivity with larger accessible surface area and 3D pore networks.
Conduction: The review stresses a recurring difficulty in balancing conductivity, porosity, activation and pore dimensionality.
Representative materials: Cu[Cu(pdt)2] · Cu[Ni(pdt)2] · KxFe2(BDP)3 · Fe-HHTP · Cu-TAPT · Fe2(dhbq)3
Nodes / linkers: Cu · Ni · Fe · pdt · BDP · HHTP · TAPT · dhbq
11 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors
Benzenehexathiolate c-MOFs considered as highly conductive lithium-battery and Li-S anchoring materials.
Conduction: The review links the small band gap and Li insertion electronic states to high conductivity, reversibility and fast Li-ion diffusion.
Representative materials: Cu-BHT
Nodes / linkers: Cu · benzenehexathiolate
13 · 3.2. c-MOFs in Batteries
c-MOFs based on HAB, HIB or BTA-like nitrogen-rich linkers where oxidation, deprotonation and oxygen strongly affect formation and crystallinity.
Conduction: Electrical properties are linked in the review to crystallinity, redox/oxygen state and interparticle impedance.
Representative materials: Co-HAB · M3(HIB)2 · Ni-BTA
Nodes / linkers: Co · Ni · Cu · hexaaminobenzene · hexaiminobenzene · benzenetetramine
4 · 2.2. Solvents
M-HHTT frameworks whose metal-dependent coordination geometry and temperature-sensitive interlayer interactions change morphology and stacking.
Conduction: The review focuses on pi-pi stacking and coordination geometry rather than reporting device transport benchmarks.
Representative materials: Cu3HHTT2 · Co6HHTT3 · M3HHTT2 · M6HHTT2
Nodes / linkers: Cu · Ni · Mg · Co · HHTT
3 · 2.1. Reaction Temperature
Quinone/quinoid c-MOFs whose metal and ligand redox activity can contribute to lithium storage or oxygen-battery catalysis.
Conduction: The review highlights redox-active metal/ligand contributions, catalytic electron transfer and topology changes under oxygen control.
Representative materials: Cu-THQ · Co-TABQ · Ni-TABQ · Cu-THQ-BPY
Nodes / linkers: Cu · Co · Ni · THQ · TABQ · TAHQ
13 · 3.2. c-MOFs in Batteries
2D honeycomb c-MOFs built from triphenylene catecholate or imine linkers and square-planar transition-metal nodes, frequently used as conductivity and EDLC exemplars.
Conduction: The review treats these as conductive porous layered frameworks whose crystallinity, rod length, stacking and ligand functionality affect conductivity, capacitance and ion transport.
Representative materials: Cu3(HHTP)2 · Ni3(HITP)2 · Co3(HITP)2 · M3(HITP)2
Nodes / linkers: Cu · Ni · Co · HHTP · HITP
10 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors · Figure 5
Lanthanide/TTFTB frameworks whose solvent and activation conditions produce different topology, stacking and retained crystallinity.
Conduction: Discussed mainly as solvent/activation-sensitive structures with TTF stacking sequences.
Representative materials: La4(HTTFTB)4 · La(HTTFTB) · La4(TTFTB)3
Nodes / linkers: La · TTFTB · HTTFTB
4 · 2.2. Solvents · Figure 1
Review-level synthesis principles remain separate from primary-study recipes.
Clean and dry c-MOF pores through solvent exchange, vacuum/heat, nitrogen drying, supercritical CO2, freeze drying or photothermal activation.
Claimed effects: Activation removes unreacted species and pore solvent, exposing surface area and ion-transport pathways, but harsh removal can destroy crystallinity.
Controlling variables: solvent polarity sequence · surface tension · vacuum temperature · supercritical CO2 drying · soaking or reflux time
Representative materials: Ni3(HITP)2 · La-HTTFTB · Fe-HHTP
Caveat: The review emphasises that activation is easily overlooked and may need gentler methods for solvent-sensitive structures.
9 · 2.8. Activation methods
Use modulators, surfactants or templates to alter deprotonation, coordination competition, particle size and interlayer stacking.
Claimed effects: Can create optimal pH windows, thin sheets, nanocrystals, altered AA stacking and film-like growth.
Controlling variables: NaOH amount · benzoic acid amount · 1-methylimidazole equivalents · pyridine or amine concentration · DMF modulator
Representative materials: 2D-vc-MOF(Cu) · Fe(TA)2 · Cu-HHTP · Cu3(HHTP)2 films
Caveat: Modulators may simultaneously affect deprotonation and coordination, making single-variable interpretation difficult.
6 · 2.4. Additives · Figure 2
Change energy delivery through conductive, microwave, ultrasound or electrochemical routes, with electrochemical synthesis also controlling metal-ion source through applied voltage/current.
Claimed effects: Heating method can affect yield, crystallinity, size and morphology; electrochemical synthesis can tune Cu2+ release and HHTP-anion growth patterns.
Controlling variables: oil bath versus sand bath · microwave irradiation · ultrasound irradiation · applied voltage · current
Representative materials: Ni2[CuPc(NH)8] · Cu3(HHTP)2 film
Caveat: Microwave and ultrasound c-MOF examples remain rare, so the review treats them as future opportunities rather than settled practice.
7 · 2.6. Heating methods
Select metal salts to exploit preferred coordination number, geometry, ligand-exchange kinetics and cluster formation.
Claimed effects: Metal choice can change synthetic order, impurity formation, stacking mode and whether pores persist.
Controlling variables: metal cation · anion identity · coordination number · ligand exchange rate · cluster formation
Representative materials: Co-HAB · Cu-HHTP · Co-CAT-1 · M-HHTT
Caveat: Anions may not directly participate but still affect nucleation, morphology and growth route.
5 · 2.3. Metal salts
Control oxygen availability and bubbling to direct oxidation, dimensionality, coordination reaction rate and crystallinity.
Claimed effects: Oxygen can be indispensable for some HIB/HITP frameworks, can change 1D/2D/3D outcome in TAHQ systems, and can reduce Fe-HHTP crystallinity when introduced at the wrong step.
Controlling variables: air exposure · nitrogen atmosphere · dissolved oxygen · oxygen bubbling · degassing
Representative materials: M3(HIB)2 · M3(HITP)2 · Ni-3D(ox) · Fe-HHTP · Ni-BTA
Caveat: Optimal oxygen content is system-specific; excessive oxygen/liquid interface can introduce defects and reduce crystallinity.
8 · 2.7. Oxygen
Treat reaction duration as an optimisation variable that may improve crystallinity only up to a point.
Claimed effects: For Cu-HHTC, crystallinity first increased then decreased as reaction time rose from 4 to 12 hours.
Controlling variables: reaction duration · growth rate · ligand dissolution · self-repair window
Representative materials: Cu-HHTC · 2D-vc-MOF(Cu)
Caveat: The review notes too few c-MOF studies to generalise whether longer reaction time improves crystallinity or has no effect.
7 · 2.5. Reaction Time
Select solvent or mixed-solvent ratios to tune reactant solubility, supersaturation, pH, surface tension, stacking and metal coordination.
Claimed effects: Solvent choice can improve crystallinity, change topology, tune TTF stacking and enable or hinder framework insertion reactions.
Controlling variables: DMF/water ratio · solvent polarity · solvation ability · pi-pi disruption · BPY insertion environment
Representative materials: Co-HAB · La4(HTTFTB)4 · Cu-THQ-BPY · Cu3HHTT2
Caveat: Some solvent effects are mechanistically unclear and may reflect coupled solvation, stacking and coordination-state changes.
4 · 2.2. Solvents
Use reaction temperature to tune nucleation, growth, supersaturation, bond formation and interlayer pi-pi interactions.
Claimed effects: Can switch plate-like, rod-like or flower-like morphology and increase particle size without sacrificing crystallinity in some systems.
Controlling variables: reaction temperature · nucleation rate · growth rate · hydrogen bonding · pi-pi stacking
Representative materials: M-HHTT · Iron-Quinoid c-MOF · Cu-HHTC
Caveat: Temperature effects are system-specific and interwoven with solvent, ligand and coordination chemistry.
3 · 2.1. Reaction Temperature
These are the review authors’ synthesis, not newly measured results.
The review states that c-MOF supercapacitor demonstrations are all 2D and that no 3D c-MOF EDLC examples had been reported, despite 3D c-MOFs offering theoretical surface-area and ion-channel advantages.
Evidence basis: review_reasoning
Caveat: Temporal statement is as of the review's literature coverage through 2023.
11 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors
3D c-MOFs are reviewed as promising but hindered by scarcity, non-conductivity in many 3D MOFs, difficulty balancing conductivity and porosity, 1D pore limitations and residual pore guests.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: The review's table uses varied measurement methods, so cross-material comparisons need method controls.
11 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors
Activation is presented as crucial for exposing pore volume and removing impurities but often overlooked; harsh solvent removal can damage crystallinity.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: Activation requirements vary by framework robustness and retained guest species.
9 · 2.8. Activation methods
Additives can alter interlayer stacking in 2D c-MOFs, including eclipsed co-facial AA and near-eclipsed staggered AA models in Cu-HHTP.
Evidence basis: single_reference
Caveat: The review notes that additives may have multiple simultaneous functions.
6 · 2.4. Additives · Figure 2
The review links c-MOF battery performance to redox-active metal/ligand states, electronic conductivity, Li-ion diffusion barriers, particle morphology and ion-diffusion path length.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: Battery mechanisms differ by chemistry and role, so this is not a single universal storage mechanism.
13 · 3.2. c-MOFs in Batteries
Compared with traditional MOFs with very high surface areas, synthesised c-MOFs typically have much lower surface areas, often below 1000 m2/g in the review's framing.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: This is a general review comparison and should not be used as an exact universal cut-off.
2 · 1. Introduction
The review reports that QM/MM simulations and comparison with experimental data suggest cations are the main charge carriers in examined Cu3(HHTP)2 and Cu3(HITP)2 supercapacitor pores.
Evidence basis: single_reference
Caveat: This is mechanism interpretation from one modelling study and should not be generalised to all electrolytes or c-MOF pores.
10 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors · Figure 5
The review presents the relationship between reaction conditions and c-MOF products as complex and difficult to decouple, so high-crystallinity synthesis often relies on trial-and-error.
Evidence basis: review_reasoning
Caveat: This is a field-level synthesis claim, not a single measured result.
3 · 2. The influence of reaction conditions
The review states that the electrical conduction mechanism in c-MOFs remains unresolved, making rational design of high-surface-area, conductive c-MOFs difficult.
Evidence basis: review_reasoning
Caveat: The statement is broad and does not deny that mechanisms are better understood for selected families.
2 · 1. Introduction
Higher crystallinity in c-MOFs is reviewed as improving accessible surface area, reducing amorphous phases and impurities, widening voltage windows and improving ion transport, thereby benefiting both energy and power density.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: This is a review-level synthesis; individual primary systems must be checked for the quantitative relationship.
2 · 1. Introduction
Electrochemical synthesis is highlighted as distinctive because metal ions are supplied by electrodes under applied voltage/current, enabling control over metal-cation concentration and oxidation state.
Evidence basis: single_reference
Caveat: The detailed growth behaviour is exemplified with Cu-HHTP film, not all c-MOFs.
7 · 2.6. Heating methods · Figure 3
For Li-S batteries, c-MOF applications are reviewed as either separator modification or sulfur-host/electrode strategies, aiming at LiPS adsorption, ion sieving and catalytic conversion.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: Reported battery metrics are secondary and depend strongly on cell configuration.
13 · 3.2. c-MOFs in Batteries · Figure 6
Metal cations can determine coordination geometry and stacking mode, with planar Cu/Ni versus octahedral Co/Mg examples producing different pore structures in HHTT systems.
Evidence basis: single_reference
Caveat: The claim is derived from specific ligand/metal examples, not a universal rule for all c-MOFs.
5 · 2.3. Metal salts
Rod length and morphology in Ni-HITP are reviewed as affecting conductivity, pore blockage, surface capacitance and ion-transport impedance.
Evidence basis: single_reference
Caveat: The review summarises a specific Ni-HITP morphology series.
10 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors
Because lithium metal has resource and safety constraints, the review frames sodium-, potassium- and zinc-ion batteries as future alternatives where c-MOFs are increasingly explored.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: The review gives representative examples rather than an exhaustive comparison of non-lithium systems.
13 · 3.2. c-MOFs in Batteries
Oxygen is treated as a synthesis variable that can be required for framework formation, alter reaction rates and even switch dimensionality in TAHQ-derived systems.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: Oxygen can also introduce defects or reduce crystallinity depending on timing and material.
8 · 2.7. Oxygen
The review cautions that single-crystal c-MOF conductivities can exceed powder values by several orders of magnitude, making measurement form important for comparisons.
Evidence basis: single_reference
Caveat: Magnitude depends on material and measurement method.
4 · 2.2. Solvents
The review reports a positive relationship between crystallinity and conductivity in Co-HAB, attributing it to reduced interparticle contact impedance in crystalline particles.
Evidence basis: single_reference
Caveat: The interpretation is reported for Co-HAB and should not be assumed for all powder c-MOFs.
4 · 2.2. Solvents
For Ni-HITP supercapacitor examples, the review states that greater crystallinity, larger specific surface area and higher capacitance correlate positively, and the voltage window expands with surface area.
Evidence basis: single_reference
Caveat: Benchmarks are secondary review values and should be checked in the original study before primary-data use.
10 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors
Every row remains visibly secondary and links to a primary dossier only where the mapping is verified.
| Material | Property | Reported value | Context and quality | Primary evidence | Review source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SecondaryCo-HAB | Na-ion low-rate capacity | 295 mAh g-1 at 50 mA g-1 | Na-ion cathode, 0.5-3.0 V; reversible 152 mAh g-1 at cycle/current conditions printed as 12000 in Table 2 Table · Exact Reported | research_0004 | 16 · 3.2. c-MOFs in Batteries · Table 2 continued |
| SecondaryCu-BHT | Li-ion reversible capacity | 175 mAh g-1 (300 mA g-1, 500 cycles, 92.4%) | Li-ion cathode, 1.5-3.0 V; low-rate capacity 232 mAh g-1 at 50 mA g-1 Table · Exact Reported | research_0365 | 15 · 3.2. c-MOFs in Batteries · Table 2 |
| SecondaryCu[Cu(pdt)2] | electrical conductivity | 6 x 10^-4 S cm-1 at 300 K | 300 K; Table 1 reports no method code in visible row Table · Exact Reported | research_0201 | 12 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors · Table 1 |
| SecondaryCu3(HHTP)2 | Zn-ion low-rate capacity | 228 mAh g-1 at 50 mA g-1 | Zn-ion cathode, 0.5-1.3 V; reversible 152.4 mAh g-1 at 500 mA g-1 after 100 cycles with 75% retention Table · Exact Reported | research_0188 | 16 · 3.2. c-MOFs in Batteries · Table 2 continued |
| SecondaryCu[Ni(pdt)2] | specific surface area | 385 m2 g-1 | porous 3D c-MOF; room-temperature conductivity row also lists 10^-8-10^-4 S cm-1 Table · Exact Reported | research_0203 | 12 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors · Table 1 |
| SecondaryCu-TAPT | electrical conductivity | 4.04 S cm-1 | Table 1 method b, two-probe crystal Table · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | 12 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors · Table 1 |
| SecondaryCu-TAPT | Na-ion low-rate capacity | 313.4 mAh g-1 at 100 mA g-1 | Na-ion cathode, 1.0-3.8 V; reversible approximately 152 mAh g-1 at 5000 mA g-1 after 1500 cycles with 77% retention Table · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | 16 · 3.2. c-MOFs in Batteries · Table 2 continued |
| SecondaryCu-THQ | Li-ion low-rate capacity | 387 mAh g-1 at 50 mA g-1 | Li-ion cathode, 1.2-4.0 V; reversible 340 mAh g-1 at 50 mA g-1 after 100 cycles with 85% retention Table · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | 15 · 3.2. c-MOFs in Batteries · Table 2 |
| SecondaryFe2(BDT)3 | electrical conductivity | 1.8 S cm-1 (oxidized) | oxidized state; Table 1 method b Table · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | 12 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors · Table 1 |
| SecondaryFe2(dhbq)3 | Langmuir surface area | 556 m2 g-1 | Table 1 method e, four-probe crystal; conductivity 1.2 x 10^-2 S cm-1 Table · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | 12 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors · Table 1 |
| SecondaryFe-HHTP | specific surface area | 1490 m2 g-1 | Table 1 method f, Van der Pauw pellet; conductivity 5.6 x 10^-3 S cm-1 Table · Exact Reported | research_0901 | 12 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors · Table 1 |
| SecondaryKxFe2(BDP)3 | specific surface area | 430-1230 m2 g-1 | Table 1 methods b,e; conductivity 10^-7-10^-2 S cm-1 Table · Range | research_0029 | 12 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors · Table 1 |
| Secondary(NBu4)2Fe2(dhbq)3 | electrical conductivity | 0.16 S cm-1 | Table 1 method a, two-probe pellet Table · Exact Reported | research_0186 | 12 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors · Table 1 |
| SecondaryNi-HITP | capacitance at higher reviewed surface area | 76 F g-1 with SSA 732 m2 g-1 | one of three Ni-HITP c-MOFs with distinct crystallinity Text · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | 10 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors |
| SecondaryNi-HITP | capacitance at lower reviewed surface area | 58 F g-1 with SSA 556 m2 g-1 | one of three Ni-HITP c-MOFs with distinct crystallinity Text · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | 10 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors |
| SecondaryNi-HITP | specific capacitance | 111 F g-1 at 0.05 A g-1 | two-electrode cell, 1 M TEABF4 in acetonitrile, current density 0.05 A g-1 Text · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | 9 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors · Figure 4 |
| SecondaryNi-HITP | capacitance retention | 90% after 10000 cycles | supercapacitor cycling stability; same review example as Figure 4 Text · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | 9 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors · Figure 4 |
| SecondaryNi-TABQ | Li-S reversible capacity | 1023 mAh g-1 (1 C, 1000 cycles, 80.2%) | Li-S separator, 1.7-2.8 V; low-rate capacity 1497 mAh g-1 at 0.1 C Table · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | 15 · 3.2. c-MOFs in Batteries · Table 2 |
| SecondaryNi-DI | Li-ion low-rate capacity | 155 mAh g-1 at 10 mA g-1 | Li-ion cathode, 2.0-4.5 V Table · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | 15 · 3.2. c-MOFs in Batteries · Table 2 |
| SecondaryZnCo-MOF NBs | Li-S reversible capacity | 668 mAh g-1 (1 C, 300 cycles, 93.1%) | Li-S cathode, 1.7-2.8 V; low-rate capacity 1076 mAh g-1 at 0.2 C Table · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | 15 · 3.2. c-MOFs in Batteries · Table 2 |
Open questions are presented as review-author priorities, not conclusions from the primary database.
3D c-MOFs remain few in number, and their conduction mechanisms are uncertain despite promising surface area, active sites and pore development.
Proposed direction: Expand 3D c-MOF synthesis and compare 2D/3D conduction and ion-transport mechanisms.
16 · 4. Summary and outlook
The review reports no 3D c-MOF EDLC applications, even though 3D c-MOFs should offer more ion adsorption sites and developed transport channels.
Proposed direction: Design 3D c-MOFs that combine conductivity, porosity, activation compatibility and electrolyte stability for EDLCs.
11 · 3.1. c-MOFs in supercapacitors
High c-MOF synthesis cost, especially for tetrathiafulvalene and triphenylene-based linkers, restricts practical application.
Proposed direction: Develop lower-cost organic linker synthesis routes.
16 · 4. Summary and outlook
Most c-MOF studies emphasise synthesis and applications but rarely resolve the crystallisation process or decouple reaction-condition effects.
Proposed direction: Study crystallisation mechanisms directly to connect reaction conditions with products and enable high-crystallinity synthesis.
16 · 4. Summary and outlook
Most experimental c-MOFs are powders, making large single crystals scarce and hindering structural and conductivity-mechanism studies.
Proposed direction: Improve preparation of large single crystals for structure determination and transport-mechanism analysis.
16 · 4. Summary and outlook
Low crystallinity and inadequate activation limit accessible surface area, ion adsorption and capacitance.
Proposed direction: Develop activation protocols and crystallinity-control methods that preserve pores and reduce defects/impurities.
16 · 4. Summary and outlook
Well-defined c-MOF structures make DFT, MD and ML increasingly useful, but the review frames these as still-developing routes for mechanism determination and new-material prediction.
Proposed direction: Use DFT, MD and ML to determine structures, study conduction/energy-storage mechanisms and screen new c-MOFs.
16 · 4. Summary and outlook
Reports of c-MOF synthesis using microwave and ultrasonic heating are rare, despite potential advantages for rapid synthesis and particle-size reduction.
Proposed direction: Investigate microwave and ultrasound synthesis systematically for c-MOF crystallinity, size and morphology control.
7 · 2.6. Heating methods
Mappings show which printed review references have a verified counterpart in the frozen primary corpus.
| Reference | Study | Role and context | Corpus mapping |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ref. 12a2017 | Title unavailable | supercapacitor_benchmark · 2d_c_mofCited for early Ni-HITP pure-electrode supercapacitor performance and Figure 4. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 162023 | Title unavailable | surface_area_context · activation_strategyCited for typical c-MOF surface areas and, via 16b, solvent exchange cleaning of Ni3(HITP)2 pores. | research_0337 |
| Ref. 172020 | Title unavailable | conduction_mechanism_contextCited in the review's introduction for unresolved c-MOF conduction mechanism and high-surface-area design challenge. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 192020 | Title unavailable | supercapacitor_benchmark · crystallinity_contextCited for high-crystallinity Ni-HITP surface-area, capacitance and voltage-window correlations, and 3D c-MOF theoretical advantages. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 212022 | Title unavailable | synthesis_challengeCited for broader difficulty of decoupling reaction conditions from MOF products. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 262021 | Title unavailable | synthesis_strategy · stacking_controlCited for temperature, solvent and metal-node effects on HHTT c-MOF morphology and stacking. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 282022 | Title unavailable | temperature_strategy · reaction_time_strategyCited for temperature control of Cu-HHTC particle size and reaction-time optimisation. | research_0025 |
| Ref. 322018 | Title unavailable | solvent_strategy · metal_salt_strategy · battery_benchmarkCited for Co-HAB solvent/crystallinity/conductivity relation, metal-salt ordering and Na-ion Table 2 benchmark. | research_0004 |
| Ref. 332014 | Title unavailable | measurement_contextCited for single-crystal versus powder conductivity comparison and solvent-exchange context. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 342019 | Title unavailable | solvent_strategy · activation_strategyCited for mixed-solvent control of La-TTFTB structures and gentle activation using supercritical CO2. | research_0048 |
| Ref. 352022 | Title unavailable | solvent_strategy · 3d_c_mof_benchmarkCited for solvent-sensitive BPY insertion into Cu-THQ and Table 1 Cu-THQ-BPY properties. | research_0038 |
| Ref. 442020 | Title unavailable | oxygen_strategyCited for absence of precipitate in nitrogen environment during M3(HITP)2 synthesis. | research_0041 |
| Ref. 45a2023 | Title unavailable | additive_strategy · oxygen_strategyCited for NaOH/pH optimisation and oxygen-content effects on 2D-vc-MOF(Cu) crystallinity. | research_0740 |
| Ref. 45c2022 | Title unavailable | additive_strategyCited for 1-methylimidazole modulator control of Fe(TA)2 nanoparticle size in Figure 2. | research_0217 |
| Ref. 492022 | Title unavailable | additive_strategy · stacking_controlCited for additive-driven morphology and interlayer stacking differences in Cu-HHTP. | research_0781 |
| Ref. 502018 | Title unavailable | additive_strategy · thin_filmCited for additive effects on Cu3(HHTP)2 film formation with alcohols, amines, azides, DMF and THF. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 562021 | Title unavailable | electrochemical_synthesis · thin_filmCited for electrochemical synthesis of Cu3(HHTP)2 film and voltage-controlled growth patterns. | research_0076 |
| Ref. 592017 | Title unavailable | oxygen_strategyCited for oxygen being indispensable in M3(HIB)2 synthesis. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 602022 | Title unavailable | oxygen_strategy · dimensionality_control · 3d_c_mof_benchmarkCited for changing 1D/2D/3D framework dimensionality through gas atmosphere and Table 1 Ni-3D(ox). | research_0434 |
| Ref. 612019 | Title unavailable | oxygen_strategy · battery_benchmarkCited for oxygen bubbling effects on Ni-BTA crystallinity and as a Na-ion Table 2 benchmark. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 712021 | Title unavailable | 3d_c_mof_benchmark · activation_strategyCited for Fe-HHTP combining conductivity, porosity and 3D pore structure, with crystalline-water caveat. | research_0901 |
| Ref. 752023 | Title unavailable | transport_mechanism · modellingCited for QM/MM supercapacitor charging mechanisms and cation carrier interpretation in Figure 5. | research_0776 |
| Ref. 762009 | Title unavailable | 3d_c_mof_benchmark · historical_framingCited for first 3D c-MOF conductivity example. | research_0201 |
| Ref. 772010 | Title unavailable | 3d_c_mof_benchmarkCited for first porous 3D c-MOF with modest surface area. | research_0203 |
| Ref. 782015 | Title unavailable | 3d_c_mof_benchmarkCited for mixed-valence ligand-based MOF conductivity with no pore presence detected. | research_0186 |
| Ref. 792018 | Title unavailable | 3d_c_mof_benchmarkCited for 3D c-MOF balancing relatively high conductivity and surface area but with 1D pore structure. | research_0029 |
| Ref. 802018 | Title unavailable | 3d_c_mof_benchmarkCited for high-conductivity 3D c-MOF Fe2(BDT)3 and Fe2+/Fe3+ adjustment. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 812023 | Title unavailable | 3d_c_mof_benchmark · battery_benchmarkCited for 3D CCP Cu-TAPT conductivity and Na-ion battery benchmark. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 822023 | Title unavailable | 3d_c_mof_benchmark · battery_benchmarkCited for Fe2(dhbq)3 conductivity and Langmuir area, and Table 2 Li-ion cathode benchmark. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 982018 | Title unavailable | battery_benchmark · redox_mechanismCited for metallically conductive bis(diimino)nickel framework in Li-ion batteries. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 992020 | Title unavailable | battery_benchmark · redox_mechanismCited for Cu-THQ Li-ion cathode capacity and metal/ligand redox activity. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 1002020 | Title unavailable | battery_mechanism · electronic_structureCited for Cu-BHT as highly conductive Li-ion cathode and DFT interpretation of Li insertion. | research_0365 |
| Ref. 1012023 | Title unavailable | battery_mechanism · morphology_transportCited for rod-like and flake-like Cu3(HHTP)2 and morphology effects on lithium-ion storage kinetics. | research_0779 |
| Ref. 1022022 | Title unavailable | battery_benchmark · li_s_separatorCited for c-MOF separator modification in Li-S batteries, including ion sieving, LiPS adsorption and catalytic conversion. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 1032023 | Title unavailable | battery_benchmark · li_s_hostCited for ZnCo bimetallic MOF nanobox sulfur hosts in Li-S batteries. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 1042018 | Title unavailable | battery_modelling · li_s_hostCited for DFT study of Cu-BHT binding of S8 and lithium polysulfides. | Unmapped |
| Ref. 108a2019 | Title unavailable | battery_benchmark · zinc_ionCited for first aqueous Zn-ion c-MOF battery example and Figure 6 mechanism schematic. | research_0188 |
| Ref. 1102020 | Title unavailable | battery_benchmarkCited in Table 2 for Cu-BHT Li-ion cathode capacities; appears bibliographically identical to Ref. 100 in this review. | research_0365 |