MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998947071 · doi:10.1088/0953-8984/24/9/096001

Multiferroic properties—structure relationships in epitaxial Bi<sub>2</sub>FeCrO<sub>6</sub>thin films: recent developments

2012· article· en· W1998947071 on OpenAlexaff
Riad Nechache, Cătălin Harnagea, A. Pignolet

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Condensed Matter · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMultiferroics and related materials
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiferroicsFerroelectricityMagnetizationMaterials scienceEpitaxyCondensed matter physicsThin filmCharacterization (materials science)OctahedronCrystallographyNanotechnologyOptoelectronicsCrystal structureChemistryPhysicsMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report recent developments in the growth and characterization of epitaxial Bi(2)FeCrO(6) (BFCO) thin films. The body of experimental data stemming mostly from our investigations, and also considering the few available reports from other groups, allows us to explain the origin(s) of the thickness dependence of the multiferroic properties observed. A drastic reduction of the films' magnetization is observed for film thicknesses larger than 80 nm. This decrease in magnetization is attributed to the formation of defects, such as antisites and antiphase boundaries, in the BFCO films. The change in magnetization is accompanied by a BFCO cell expansion, a consequence of the volume increase of the oxygen octahedra surrounding the Fe cations induced by the defects. BFCO films are ferroelectric for all the thicknesses investigated, ferroelectricity being only moderately affected by the film thickness.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations30
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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