MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993370905 · doi:10.1063/1.2464085

Phase diagram and adsorption-desorption kinetics of CO on Ru(0001) from first principles

2007· article· en· W1993370905 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jean‐Sabin McEwen, A. Eichler

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDesorptionIsobarAdsorptionPhase diagramThermodynamicsDensity functional theoryChemistryKineticsMoleculeKinetic energyDiagramPhase (matter)Physical chemistryComputational chemistryAtomic physicsPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A kinetic lattice gas model is used to study the equilibrium properties and the desorption kinetics of CO on Ru(0001). The authors compute all relevant on-site binding and interaction energies of CO molecules within density functional theory and import them in two different models. The first model allows the CO molecules to adsorb upright on top and hollow sites. The authors calculate the phase diagram, coverage isobars, and temperature programed desorption spectra. Up to a coverage of 1/3 ML, very good agreement is obtained between theory and experiment when considering top sites only. For coverages beyond 1/3 ML, hollow sites are included and disagreement between theory and experiment occurs. The second model allows adsorption on top sites only but allows them to tilt and shift from their upright positions. The authors show that this model resolves many of the deficiencies of their first one. Furthermore, the authors demonstrate that this model is more consistent with experiment since it is the only model that is able to explain the results from IR-spectroscopy experiments.

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 score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.519

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations40
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207