MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983757943 · doi:10.1063/1.3481344

A search for defect related ferromagnetism in SrTiO3

2010· article· en· W1983757943 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectronic and Structural Properties of Oxides
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFerromagnetismAnnealing (glass)ImpurityHysteresisMagnetic hysteresisFerromagnetic material propertiesDiffraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Room temperature ferromagnetic hysteresis is observed in commercial SrTiO3 substrates purchased from a variety of suppliers. It is shown that the ferromagnetic signal comes from the unpolished surfaces. Surface impurity phases cannot be detected using either x-ray diffraction or energy dispersive x-ray spectra on the unpolished surfaces. However, a possible correlation between surface disorder (x-ray diffraction peak linewidth) and ferromagnetism is observed. Ar ion bombardment (10–90 keV) can be used to produce surface layer disorder but is not found to induce ferromagnetism. Annealing of the substrates at temperatures ranging from 600 to 1100 °C is found to alter the hysteresis curves differently depending on whether the annealing is performed in air or in vacuum. Identical annealing behavior is observed if the substrates are artificially spiked with iron. This suggests that the ferromagnetic hysteresis of as purchased SrTiO3 could be due to Fe contamination of the unpolished surfaces. In addition, it is shown that no ferromagnetism is observed in samples that contain 1019–1021 cm−3 of oxygen vacancies if all the faces are polished.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations23
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicElectronic and Structural Properties of OxidesFrench-language works237,207