Evaluation of<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>CuO</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math>plane hole doping in<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>YBa</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Cu</mml:mi><mml:mn>3</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn>6</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math>single crystals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The electron hole concentration $p$ in the ${\mathrm{CuO}}_{2}$ planes of ${\mathrm{YBa}}_{2}{\mathrm{Cu}}_{3}{\mathrm{O}}_{6+x}$ (YBCO) has been evaluated using the unit cell length in the $c$ direction together with a simple estimation for $p$ in the chain oxygen-ordered phases. The empirical relationship between $p$ and $c$ obtained allows the calculation of $p$ from the $c$-axis lattice parameter for the entire doping range of YBCO. It is also suggested that the empirical parabola describing the relationship between ${T}_{c}$ and $p$ in ${\mathrm{La}}_{2\ensuremath{-}x}{\mathrm{Sr}}_{x}{\mathrm{CuO}}_{4}$ is reasonably correct for YBCO except for the region around $p=1∕8\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}(x=0.67)$, where the ${T}_{c}$ of YBCO is suppressed by as much as $17\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\mathrm{K}$. A plot of $p$ vs $x$ and a correction of the parabola for the $p=1∕8$ effect are presented, allowing convenient determination of $p$ from $x$ and ${T}_{c}$.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.006 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".