Electrochemical 3D atomic force microscopy (EC-3D-AFM) revealed that when lithium-containing nanoscale clusters nucleate at a graphite electrode in an ionic-liquid electrolyte, the adjacent electrical double layer (EDL) undergoes bending, breaking, and reconnecting reconfigurations whose pattern switches with cluster size (Ai et al., PNAS 2025). What governs these reconfigurations remains unestablished: the proposed mechanism (steric/entropic packing, possibly combined with interfacial electric-field effects, long-range ionic-liquid correlations, and ion permeation through clusters) is unquantified; the clusters lack in situ chemical identification; the phenomenon is verified only for one electrolyte/electrode system; and the causal link from local EDL configuration to electrochemical function (overpotentials, interphase growth rates and composition) is unproven. The open problem is to establish, quantitatively and with chemical specificity, the mechanism, generality, and functional consequences of EDL reconfiguration at heterogeneous electrodes.

Background

The electrical double layer (EDL) is the nanometer-thick interfacial region of ions and oriented solvent molecules that forms at an electrode in contact with an electrolyte and screens the electrode charge; its structure controls charge storage, reaction kinetics, and interphase formation in batteries and other electrochemical devices. The solid-electrolyte interphase (SEI) is the passivating layer of decomposition products that grows on battery anodes; it is chemically heterogeneous from its earliest nucleation stage, and the origin of this heterogeneity is a central open question. Most EDL knowledge comes from ideal flat electrodes, while real electrodes are heterogeneous. EC-3D-AFM (electrochemical 3D atomic force microscopy) is a technique in which an AFM tip is rastered in three dimensions inside an electrochemical cell while its oscillation phase and reconstructed force are recorded, yielding spatial maps of interfacial liquid density oscillations; in the 3D-AFM community, the exact mapping from measured force/phase to quantitative molecular density, charge density, and composition is still under debate, so phase/force oscillation amplitude is used as a relative density descriptor. Using EC-3D-AFM, Ai et al. imaged the EDL of a battery-anode model system — 0.2 M LiTFSI (lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide) in the ionic liquid EMIM-TFSI (1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium TFSI) on highly oriented pyrolytic graphite (HOPG) — during potentiostatic growth of thin lithium-containing nanoscale adlayer/cluster domains that mimic early-stage SEIs. On flat areas the EDL shows discrete damped-oscillation layers; at cluster sites the EDL layers bend, break, and reconnect, with the pattern switching as the local cluster size grows. Prior context makes the mechanism nontrivial: surface force apparatus measurements found long-range electrostatic screening in ionic liquids extending ~10 nm (Gebbie et al. 2015), and infrared pump-probe studies reported interfacial correlation lengths of tens of nanometers, while the observed AFM oscillations decay within ~1 nm — so putative long-range lateral correlations could coexist with, and compete against, vertical steric (molecular-packing) constraints at cluster edges. A companion study (Kim et al., Chem. Mater. 2024) had shown that EDL structure modulates SEI growth, making the local EDL a candidate cause of SEI heterogeneity. In the published discussion, the authors attribute the overall reconfiguration patterns mainly to steric/entropic effects, with the density-oscillation amplitude changes possibly arising from electric-field-induced ion shuffling, long-range interactions, or ion permeation through the clusters — but this decomposition is explicitly a hypothesis, unquantified by any measurement or calculation, and the system was studied at mild potentials (flat areas 0.5 to −0.5 V vs Pt; cluster sites at −0.5 and −0.8 V vs Pt) where the sparse nanoclusters could not be chemically mapped in situ (composition was inferred from ex situ photoinduced force microscopy, PiFM — an AFM-based technique that maps infrared absorption locally — after harsh growth at −1.4 V and drying, plus bulk in situ Raman on carbon black at more negative potentials).

Problem Statement

Establish, quantitatively and with chemical specificity, how and why electrical double layers restructure at heterogeneous electrodes during interphase nucleation — the question left open by Ai et al. (PNAS 2025) — by resolving the following jointly contributing components of one objective (a validated, predictive picture of EDL reconfiguration at real heterogeneous electrodes and its role in electrochemical nucleation and growth): (1) Mechanism — determine the interactions that produce the observed bending, breaking, and reconnecting EDL patterns and their accompanying density-oscillation amplitude changes, including the magnitude, range, and functional form of any lateral correlations in the ionic-liquid EDL near interphase clusters, and how they couple to vertical steric packing, interfacial electric-field effects, and possible ion permeation through clusters; that is, replace the authors' multi-factor hypothesis with a validated decomposition. (2) Chemical identity — identify, in situ/operando and with nanoscale spatial resolution, the chemical composition and spatial distribution of species in the nucleated nanoscale clusters and their surrounding EDL under the EC-3D-AFM growth conditions (extending the ex situ PiFM and bulk in situ Raman evidence). (3) Generality — determine whether the bending–breaking–reconnecting sequence and its cluster-size-dependent switching persist across other electrolyte compositions and salt concentrations, other electrode materials, and taller clusters, and extract any scaling rules. (4) Function — establish the quantitative connection between local EDL configurations and macroscopic electrochemical function, e.g., local overpotentials, interphase growth rates and composition, and long-term SEI evolution.

References

  1. Ai, Q., Bonagiri, L. K. S., Panse, K. S., Kim, J., Zhou, S., & Zhang, Y. (2025). Nucleation at solid–liquid interfaces is accompanied by the reconfiguration of electrical double layers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122, e2421635122. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2421635122. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2421635122
  2. Ai, Q., Bonagiri, L. K. S., Panse, K. S., Kim, J., Zhou, S., & Zhang, Y. (2024). Bending, breaking, and reconnecting of the electrical double layers at heterogeneous electrodes. arXiv:2410.01339. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.01339. https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.01339 (preprint version of the same work)
  3. Ai, Q., Wu, H., Bonagiri, L. K. S., Panse, K. S., Zhou, S., Zhao, F., Li, Y., Schweizer, K. S., Aluru, N. R., & Zhang, Y. (2026). Liquid structure adjacent to solid surfaces follows the superposition principle. arXiv:2603.25992. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2603.25992. https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.25992
  4. Bonagiri, L. K. S., Arvelo, D. M., Zhao, F., Kim, J., Ai, Q., Zhou, S., Panse, K. S., Garcia, R., & Zhang, Y. (2026). Probing the molecular structure at graphite–water interfaces by correlating 3D-AFM and SHINERS. Nature Communications, 17, 2230. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-026-68667-y. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-026-68667-y
  5. Nguyen, T., Liu, Z., & Lopez, J. (2026). Operando surface-enhanced infrared spectroscopy reveals electric double layer evolution during solid electrolyte interphase formation. Faraday Discussions. DOI: 10.1039/d6fd00044d. https://doi.org/10.1039/d6fd00044d
  6. He, Y., Wang, L., & He, X. (2025). Material-specific electric double layers: Reviewing the theory to advance understanding of battery interfaces. Energy Storage Materials, 82, 104554. DOI: 10.1016/j.ensm.2025.104554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ensm.2025.104554
  7. Kim, J., Zhao, F., Bonagiri, L. K. S., Ai, Q., & Zhang, Y. (2024). Electrical double layers modulate the growth of solid–electrolyte interphases. Chemistry of Materials, 36, 9156–9166. DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemmater.4c01745. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemmater.4c01745
  8. Gebbie, M. A., Dobbs, H. A., Valtiner, M., & Israelachvili, J. N. (2015). Long-range electrostatic screening in ionic liquids. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112, 7432–7437. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1508366112. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1508366112
  9. Wang, W.-W., Yan, H., Gu, Y., Yan, J., & Mao, B.-W. (2024). In situ electrochemical atomic force microscopy: From interfaces to interphases. Annual Review of Analytical Chemistry, 17, 103–126. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-anchem-061422-020428. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anchem-061422-020428
  10. Yang, H., Hu, G., Fu, K., Li, X., Sun, K., & Tan, P. (2025). Modeling of interface reactions for lithium-ion batteries under high-rate conditions. Chinese Chemical Letters, article 111999. DOI: 10.1016/j.cclet.2025.111999. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cclet.2025.111999
  11. Ye, D., Kong, Y.-C., Xu, C.-H., Ma, Z., Xiong, Y., Zhao, H., & Zhao, W. (2026). Transient imaging of the oxygen reduction reaction at single nanocatalysts. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 148, 1457–1464. DOI: 10.1021/jacs.5c18188. https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.5c18188
  12. Li, Y., Ai, Q., Bonagiri, L. K. S., & Zhang, Y. (2025). Coexistence of two types of liquid structures at platinum–water interfaces. The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 129, 21486–21495. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.5c06276. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.5c06276