# Effect of MXene Nanosheet Sticking on Supercapacitor Device Performance
## 4 Approaches for Preventing Sticking of MXenes
### Electrode Processing Optimization
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Strategy** & **Performance Metrics** & **Metrics** & **Demerits** & **Refs.** \\ \hline MXene coating & High specific capacitance & Improved electrical conductivity; enhanced ion accessibility & Potential issues with scalability; stability concerns & [87, 88] \\ \hline Doping & Fast charge/ discharge rates & Increased specific capacitance; improved cycling stability & Dependent on choice of dopant; cost implications & [89, 90] \\ \hline Nanostructuring & High energy density & Enhanced surface area; improved electrolyte penetration & Complexity in fabrication; potential loss of mechanical strength & [91, 92] \\ \hline Hybrid materials & Long-term cycling stability & Combined benefits of different materials; complementary properties & Synthesis challenges; compatibility issues & [93, 94] \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Comparative analysis of strategies employed for enhancing supercapacitor performance. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Material** & **Stackability Characteristics** & **Factors Influencing** & **Impact on** & **Refs.** \\  & **Satasheet Cohesion** & **Supercapacitor Performance** & **Refs.** \\ \hline MXene coating & Potential issues with stackability due to strong inter-particle bonds & Coating stability, uniformity, and adhesion to substrates & Influence on capacitance, electrical properties, and overall stability & [95] \\ \hline Doping & Reliability of nanosheet stacking dependent on dopant choice & Integration of dopants, impact on nanosheet interactions & Effects on capacitance, cycling stability, and cost implications & [96] \\ \hline Nanostructuring & Challenges in stacking during fabrication; potential impact on strength & Complexity of fabrication process, nanosheet alignment & Relationship to energy density, surface area enhancement, and electrolyte penetration & [97] \\ \hline Hybrid materials & Stackability influenced by material compatibility and synthesis issues & Compatibility between materials, stacking interactions & Impact on long-term stability, leveraging diverse material benefits & [98] \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Comparison of stackability and nanosheet cohesion and their impact on the supercapacitor performance. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**MXene Strategy** & **Performance Metrics** & **Advantages** & **Disadvantages** & **Refs.** \\
**Device Performance** & & Improved wettability; increased ion accessibility & Potential process complexity; stability concerns & [99, 100] \\ \hline Nanocomposites & Higher energy density & Synergistic effects with additives; enhanced structural stability & Challenges in achieving homogeneous dispersion; synthesis complexity & [101] \\ \hline Templated growth & Improved rate capability & Controlled morphology; facilitates ion transport pathways & Limited scalability; template removal process & [102] \\ \hline Surface modification & Enhanced cycling stability & Improved conductivity; resistance to electrolyte-induced degradation & Reversibility issues; potential impact on mechanical properties & [103] \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of the basic MXene strategies for enhancing storage device performance.