MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evolution of magnetoelectric properties of Sc-diluted TbMnO<sub>3</sub>

2013· article· en· W1967237346 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Vera Cuartero, J. Blasco, J. Garcı́a, Jolanta Stankiewicz, G. Subı́as, J. Alberto Rodríguez‐Velamazán, C. Ritter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Condensed Matter · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMultiferroics and related materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRyerson University
KeywordsCondensed matter physicsFerroelectricityParamagnetismMaterials scienceMagnetic momentDilutionIonFerromagnetismAntiferromagnetismChemistryPhysicsDielectricThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The magnetoelectric properties of the TbMn(1-x)Sc(x)O3 series have been studied at low temperatures by means of heat capacity, magnetic measurements and impedance spectroscopy. TbMnO3 exhibits as expected three transitions upon lowering the temperature corresponding to the magnetic ordering of the two sublattices (Mn and Tb) and the ferroelectric transition. Ferroelectricity disappears with Sc dilution for x > 0.1 because the non-collinear magnetic arrangement is destroyed. The dilution of Mn with a non-magnetic ion is also detrimental to the magnetic ordering of both Mn and Tb sublattices. The system evolves to a magnetic glassy state for the intermediate compositions. Formal TbScO3 shows Sc-deficiency and long range magnetic ordering of Tb(3+) moments in the ab-plane brought by the direct interaction between Tb(3+) ions. This ordering is different from the one found in TbMnO3 due to the lack of magnetic coupling between Tb- and Mn-sublattices. A small substitution of Sc by Mn in TbScO3 destroys the Tb ordering giving rise to a magnetic glass behaviour. This effect is ascribed to the partial polarization of Tb sublattice by the paramagnetic Mn which competes with the direct Tb-Tb exchange.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Condensed MatterSame topicMultiferroics and related materialsFrench-language works237,207