The Effect of Synthetic Method and Annealing Temperature on Metal Site Preference in Al<sub>1–<i>x</i></sub>Ga<sub><i>x</i></sub>FeO<sub>3</sub>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Magnetoelectric materials couple both magnetic and electronic properties, making them attractive for use in multifunctional devices. The magnetoelectric AFeO3 compounds (Pna2(1); A = Al, Ga) have received attention as the properties of the system depend on composition as well as the synthetic method used. Al(1-x)Ga(x)FeO3. (0 ≤ x ≤ 1) was synthesized by the sol-gel and coprecipitation methods and studied by X-ray absorption near-edge spectroscopy (XANES). Al L(2,3-), Ga K-, and Fe K-edge XANES spectra were collected to examine how the average metal coordination number (CN) changes with the synthetic method. Al and Fe were found to prefer octahedral sites, while Ga prefers the tetrahedral site. It was found that composition played a larger role in determining site occupancies than synthetic method. Samples made by the sol-gel or ceramic methods (reported previously; Walker, J. D. S.; Grosvenor, A. P. J. Solid State Chem. 2013, 197, 147-153) showed smaller spectral changes than samples made via the coprecipitation method. This is attributed to greater ion mobility in samples synthesized via coprecipitation as the reactants do not have a long-range polymeric or oxide network during synthesis like samples synthesized via the sol-gel or ceramic method. Increasing annealing temperature increases the average coordination number of Al, and to a lesser extent Ga, while the average coordination number of Fe decreases. This study indicates that greater disorder is observed when the Al(1-x)Ga(x)FeO3. compounds have high Al content, and when annealed at higher temperatures.
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".