Lattice Graph × Inlyte Energy

Lattice Graph operates a computational materials-discovery platform that traces candidate compositions from raw formula through thermodynamic stability, property prediction, and patent landscape in a single governed workflow. At its core sits a materials knowledge graph spanning millions of compositions, each node carrying multi-source evidence: density-functional theory calculations, machine-learning interatomic potential predictions from independent engines including MACE and CHGNet, experimental literature extractions, and synthesis recipes. When any two engines disagree on a stability prediction, that disagreement is surfaced explicitly rather than buried in a single number, giving a materials team an honest confidence interval on any candidate before a single gram is synthesized. Stability screening is not a single-engine bet. Lattice Graph runs phonon stability and thermodynamic consensus across multiple independent physics engines and flags candidates where MLIP predictions diverge from DFT or from each other, which is exactly the situation that matters for sodium-ion conductors and halide interfaces where the potential energy surface is shallow and small compositional changes flip stability. On the intellectual property side, the platform maintains composition- and claim-level screening across more than 306,000 materials patents, allowing the team to map which exact compositions, structural phases, and positional claims are blocked, where the defensible whitespace sits, and which filing strategies carve a clean path forward. The large atlas of labeled negative results, documenting failed interface, coating, and electrolyte attempts that never reached the public literature, completes the picture by preventing teams from re-running known dead ends. For a company like Inlyte Energy, whose entire durability and IP story concentrates at the sodium-metal interface, the sodium-ion separator, and the iron-chloride positive-electrode chemistry, the platform answers three questions simultaneously: which candidate Na-conductor or interface-layer compositions are thermodynamically stable and why, which of those compositions are free of blocking claims in a crowded sodium filing landscape, and what has already been tried and failed in adjacent sodium-interface and halide-chemistry programs. That combination is not available from any single literature search or single-engine simulation.

Inlyte Energy is building an iron-sodium battery on ZEBRA-lineage chemistry: a molten sodium-metal negative electrode paired with an iron-chloride positive through a sodium-ion-conducting ceramic separator. The structural appeal is real — earth-abundant iron and sodium chloride, no lithium or cobalt, an inherently non-flammable cell, and a cost floor that lithium-ion cannot reach for multi-hour stationary storage. But the technical and IP risk of that chemistry concentrates in a small number of surfaces: the sodium-metal anode interface where void formation and dendrite penetration determine cycle life, the sodium-ion separator where interfacial resistance growth gates durability, and the chloride positive-electrode chemistry where halide interdiffusion drives degradation. These are also the most heavily filed lanes in energy-storage IP right now, which means Inlyte is building into a crowded patent landscape at exactly the moment it needs to lock in compositions and processes. Lattice Graph's solid-state battery electrolytes and interfaces portfolio was built around precisely that materials territory. The sodium-compatible and halide electrolyte arms of the portfolio span engineered anode-side interlayers, dry-film sodium-conductor architectures, oxide-buffered halide and sulfide stacks, and the process methods that assemble them — all characterized for freedom to operate at the composition and claim level, and each carrying explicit documentation of which neighboring claims are blocked and where the defensible whitespace lies. The portfolio was screened in an all-solid-state-battery context, and Lattice Graph is candid that the sodium and halide assets need measured coupon-level validation against Inlyte's actual stack. What they offer is the curated starting point: freedom-to-operate-cleared interface and coating IP with multi-engine stability backing, surrounding the three failure modes Inlyte is engineering against. The strategic fit is two-directional. On the defensive side, Inlyte can use Lattice Graph's freedom-to-operate screening against its own Na/FeCl2 compositions, separator coatings, and interface films before committing to a major filing — a particularly high-leverage step in a sodium landscape where the prior art is decades deep and a bare composition claim is rarely defensible. On the offensive side, the portfolio assets give Inlyte a set of engineered-interface and process positions — claimed not as bulk compositions but by positional definition, process window, or measured durability endpoint — that can bracket its chemistry and be co-developed into jointly-held claims shaped around Inlyte's real cell architecture.

Inlyte Energy is building an iron-sodium battery on ZEBRA-lineage chemistry: a molten sodium-metal negative electrode paired with an iron-chloride positive through a sodium-ion-conducting ceramic separator. The structural appeal is real — earth-abundant iron and sodium chloride, no lithium or cobalt, an inherently non-flammable cell, and a cost floor that lithium-ion cannot reach for multi-hour stationary storage. But the technical and IP risk of that chemistry concentrates in a small number of surfaces: the sodium-metal anode interface where void formation and dendrite penetration determine cycle life, the sodium-ion separator where interfacial resistance growth gates durability, and the chloride positive-electrode chemistry where halide interdiffusion drives degradation. These are also the most heavily filed lanes in energy-storage IP right now, which means Inlyte is building into a crowded patent landscape at exactly the moment it needs to lock in compositions and processes. Lattice Graph's solid-state battery electrolytes and interfaces portfolio was built around precisely that materials territory. The sodium-compatible and halide electrolyte arms of the portfolio span engineered anode-side interlayers, dry-film sodium-conductor architectures, oxide-buffered halide and sulfide stacks, and the process methods that assemble them — all characterized for freedom to operate at the composition and claim level, and each carrying explicit documentation of which neighboring claims are blocked and where the defensible whitespace lies. The portfolio was screened in an all-solid-state-battery context, and Lattice Graph is candid that the sodium and halide assets need measured coupon-level validation against Inlyte's actual stack. What they offer is the curated starting point: freedom-to-operate-cleared interface and coating IP with multi-engine stability backing, surrounding the three failure modes Inlyte is engineering against. The strategic fit is two-directional. On the defensive side, Inlyte can use Lattice Graph's freedom-to-operate screening against its own Na/FeCl2 compositions, separator coatings, and interface films before committing to a major filing — a particularly high-leverage step in a sodium landscape where the prior art is decades deep and a bare composition claim is rarely defensible. On the offensive side, the portfolio assets give Inlyte a set of engineered-interface and process positions — claimed not as bulk compositions but by positional definition, process window, or measured durability endpoint — that can bracket its chemistry and be co-developed into jointly-held claims shaped around Inlyte's real cell architecture.

The solid-state battery electrolytes and interfaces portfolio covers the exact materials territory that gates Inlyte's durability story: sodium-compatible conductors and interfaces, oxide-buffered halide stacks, anode-side interlayers, and the manufacturing methods that assemble them. For a lithium-metal all-solid-state battery program the lithium families in this portfolio dominate; for Inlyte, the value is concentrated in the sodium arm and the halide architecture, because those map directly onto the sodium-metal interface, the sodium-ion separator, and the chloride positive-electrode chemistry that define the Na/FeCl2 cell. On the sodium conductor and interface side, the portfolio holds a dry-film, solvent-free divalent-doped Na3PS4 electrolyte system designed for sodium solid-state batteries, paired with a sodium-metal stabilization layer — the combination directly relevant to Inlyte's separator and sodium-metal electrode interface, and claimed at the system and process level rather than the anticipated bulk thiophosphate composition where prior art is dense. Alongside it, the integrated all-solid-state battery cell stack architecture provides an endpoint-qualified multilayer reference that Inlyte's engineers can use to situate candidate interface layers and coatings within a validated stack geometry, even where the specific chemistries differ. On the halide and interface architecture side, the oxide-buffered halide and sulfide trilayer — claimed by a measured endpoint of no more than twenty-five percent interfacial-resistance growth over five hundred hours — and the corresponding assembly process method translate directly to the physics of chloride-interface interdiffusion and impedance growth that Inlyte faces at its iron-chloride positive electrode. The rare-earth halide family covering thulium, ytterbium, and lutetium lithium chloride compositions in a buffer-protected stack captures whitespace distinct from the already-patented yttrium and erbium analogues, offering Inlyte a template for how to find and claim open positions in a halide landscape with crowded incumbents. The anode-side interlayer process method, validated to a critical current density threshold on garnet, rounds out the interface-engineering layer of the portfolio with a transferable process approach for suppressing metal-anode failure modes.

In day-to-day use, an Inlyte materials or IP engineer would spend most of their time in two parts of the platform: the freedom-to-operate and patent-whitespace workflow and the knowledge-graph explorer. A typical session starts by loading a candidate sodium-ion conductor, separator coating, or sodium-metal interface layer and running composition- and claim-level screening to map what is blocked versus open in the sodium and chloride filing lanes. From there, the knowledge-graph explorer provides a composition-360 view of that material — structure, multi-source formation-energy and stability evidence with cross-engine trust flags, property edges including ionic conductivity predictions, and the patents and synthesis recipes attached to it. The negative-results layer surfaces alongside, showing which neighboring interface or coating attempts have already failed before the team commits bench time to them. Batch screening, composition-intelligence reports, and the supply-intelligence views round out the toolkit for a scale-up in Inlyte's position. The team can batch-screen a family of Na-conductor or interface candidates at once and generate shareable composition-intelligence reports per material for internal review or partner diligence conversations. The battery and synthesis workflow views help organize evidence specifically around the Na/FeCl2 stack geometry. Supply-intelligence views — element-level risk and conversion-route data for sodium and iron — give the commercial team a substantiated earth-abundant, supply-secure narrative for investor and offtaker conversations, contrasting Inlyte's cost floor cleanly against lithium, nickel, and cobalt exposure.

Because Inlyte fits the assets archetype, the engagement runs on two parallel tracks. The first is a scoped freedom-to-operate and patent-whitespace evaluation run against Inlyte's own Na/FeCl2 compositions, separator coatings, and sodium-metal interface films — ideally timed ahead of Inlyte's next major filing cycle. This engagement produces a documented whitespace map of the sodium and chloride patent lanes at composition and claim resolution, identifying where Inlyte's proposed positions are clear, where they are crowded, and where the next defensible filing should sit. This track can begin immediately and is priced in the tens-of-thousands range as a scoped evaluation, converting to an ongoing subscription as the filing roadmap develops. The second track is a license or co-development arrangement on the sodium-interface and halide-architecture assets. The natural entry point is an option-to-license on one or two assets — for example the dry-film divalent-doped Na3PS4 system and the oxide-buffered trilayer process method — with a defined evaluation period during which Inlyte's engineers run measured coupon-level validation against their actual stack, converting to a field-limited license or joint continuation filing if the data supports it. Several of these assets carry open proof gates (measured AC-impedance and sodium-metal coupon data are the outstanding validation steps), which makes a co-development structure that shares experimental validation particularly clean: Inlyte shapes the claims around its real chemistry and contributes to the evidence record, while Lattice Graph provides the computational stability backing, the freedom-to-operate characterization, and the filing infrastructure. All commercial terms are illustrative starting points for a scoping conversation rather than fixed commitments.