## 2 Results and Discussion  
### Morphology and Structure of Materials  
Firstly, the microstructure of GO and PANI-GO was characterized using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Figure S1a-c displays the SEM images of GO at different mag nifications, revealing a layered structure with large sheet dimensions and no apparent aggregation. After the PANI treatment, as shown in Figure S1d-f, the sheet size of GO reduced and numerous wrinkles appeared. The elemental distribution of PANI-GO, illustrated in Figure S1g-i, indicates the presence of C, O, and N elements. The O element originates from the oxygen-containing functional groups on the GO surface, while the presence of N confirms that PANI has been successfully and uniformly coated onto the GO surface. Subsequently, both GO and PANI-GO were dispersed into solutions, and their Zeta potentials were measured. As shown in Figure S2, the initial Zeta potential of GO was \(-67.3\) mV. Given that Mo\({}_{7}\)O\({}_{24}\)\({}^{6-}\) is negatively charged, electrostatic repulsion between GO and Mo\({}_{7}\)O\({}_{24}\)\({}^{6-}\) hinders the adsorption of Mo\({}_{7}\)O\({}_{24}\)\({}^{6-}\) on the GO surface and the uniform growth of MoS\({}_{2}\). After modification with PANI, the Zeta potential shifted to \(31.8\) mV. Under these conditions, Mo\({}_{7}\)O\({}_{24}\)\({}^{6-}\) is uniformly and strongly adsorbed onto the PANI-GO surface via electrostatic attraction and chelation, ensuring the uniform distribution of MoS\({}_{2}\) on the GO surface without aggregation. Figure 1a-c presents the SEM images of MoS\({}_{2}\) at different magnifications, where the morphology of MoS\({}_{2}\) is observed as nanosheet-assembled nanoflowers, with diameters ranging from approximately 200 to 300 nm and sheet thicknesses of around 10 nm. Due to the absence of supporting material, pure MoS\({}_{2}\) nanoflowers are not uniformly dispersed and exhibit slight aggregation. Figure 1d-f depicts the SEM images of MoS\({}_{2}\)-G, where GO was not modified with PANI. Even though some MoS\({}_{2}\) nanoflowers successfully grew uniformly on the GO surface, a significant portion of MoS\({}_{2}\) nanoflowers still heavily agglomerated on the GO surface. Upon increasing the magnification of the SEM images, it is evident that the morphology of the MoS\({}_{2}\) nanoflowers in MoS\({}_{2}\)-G does not significantly differ from that of pure MoS\({}_{2}\), and aggregation remains prominent. In contrast, Figure 1g-i displays the SEM images of MoS\({}_{2}\)-NG at different magnifications. Due to the PANI modification, MoS\({}_{2}\) nanoflowers are uniformly distributed on the GO surface without noticeable aggregation, maintaining a diameter of approximately 200-300 nm. Comparing the microstructures of MoS\({}_{2}\), MoS\({}_{2}\)-G, and Mo be inferred that the PANI modification effectively changed the surface charge of GO from negative to positive. This surface modification created sites capable of uniformly adsorbing Mo/O24\({}^{6-}\), effectively preventing the aggregation of MoS2 nanoflowers during their formation and promoting the growth of thinner nanosheets. Compared to pure MoS2 and MoS2-G, MoS2-NG exhibits more exposed active sites, offering superior catalytic activity for polysulfides when applied to the modification of separators in lithium-sulfur batteries. Figure 2a-f presents the elemental distribution of MoS2-NG, which primarily consists of C, O, N, Mo, and S elements. The C, O, and N elements originate from the GO, while the Mo and S elements are derived from the MoS2 nanoflowers. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images of MoS2 (Figure 2g,h) reveal significant stacking of the nanosheets and aggregation among the nanoflowers. Fourier transform calculations show an interlayer spacing of 0.64 nm, corresponding to the (002) plane of MoS2. In contrast, as shown in Figure 2i-k, the morphology of MoS2 nanoflowers in MoS2-NG is more uniform and well-distributed on the GO surface without noticeable aggregation.