Nanocomposite Nd-rich Nd–Fe–B alloys: Approaching ideal Stoner–Wohlfarth type behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Starting from rapidly quenched NdδFe13.1B(2.05⩽δ⩽147.6) alloys and by appropriate annealing, the microstructure was tailored from strongly interacting Nd2Fe14B grains to magnetically isolated single domain Nd2Fe14B grains embedded in a nonmagnetic Nd-rich matrix (α-Nd and γ-Nd). This change in microstructure was found to have a large effect on coercivity, i.e., coercivity, μ0Hc, increases with an increase of the Nd concentration from 1.25 T in Nd2.05Fe13.1B to 2.75 T in Nd147.6Fe13.1B at 290 K. Using transmission electron microscopy, the Nd2Fe14B grains in Nd147.6Fe13.1B were confirmed to be randomly oriented platelets with the c axis normal to the plate and an average size of 100×40×25 nm. For these randomly oriented, noninteracting, single domain Nd2Fe14B grains, the coercivity was calculated using a Stoner–Wohlfarth model which included the shape anisotropy of the grains. The observed coercivity of Nd2Fe14B in such nanocomposite Nd147.6Fe13.1B alloys is ∼83% of its theoretical value.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".