MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008759864 · doi:10.1088/0953-8984/16/36/015

Theoretical investigation of the electronic structure and transport properties of Na<sub>1+<i>x</i></sub>Co<sub>2</sub>O<sub>4</sub>

2004· article· en· W2008759864 on OpenAlexaff
Xing Gao, John S. Tse, D. D. Klug

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Condensed Matter · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced Thermoelectric Materials and Devices
Canadian institutionsSteacie Institute for Molecular Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeebeck coefficientCondensed matter physicsDensity functional theoryElectronic band structureElectronic structureParamagnetismMaterials scienceChemistryThermoelectric effectPhysicsComputational chemistryThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The validity of a simple band description for explaining the unexpectedly large thermopower in Na1+xCo2O4 was investigated. Non-spin-polarized and spin-polarized electronic structures of layered cobalt oxides Na1+xCo2O4 are studied by means of first-principles density functional theory calculations. The fractional occupancy of Na is described via two approaches--the virtual crystal approximation and the rigid band model. We also found that the band structure of the valence band is very sensitive to the geometry of the CoO6 'octahedron', and cannot be described by a simple crystal field model. The Seebeck coefficients are calculated from the standard kinetic theory. The calculated thermopower demonstrates the importance of a high density of states close to the Fermi level. The calculated Seebeck coefficient based on the paramagnetic band structure is apparently in good agreement with experimental observation although it has been suggested that spin entropy may dominate the thermopower. However, the calculation failed to account for the observed negative in-plane Hall coefficient.

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 score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations7
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Condensed MatterSame topicAdvanced Thermoelectric Materials and DevicesFrench-language works237,207