Atomic and electronic structure of unreduced and reduced CeO2 surfaces: A first-principles study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The atomic and electronic structure of (111), (110), and (100) surfaces of ceria (CeO2) were studied using density-functional theory within the generalized gradient approximation. Both stoichiometric surfaces and surfaces with oxygen vacancies (unreduced and reduced surfaces, respectively) have been examined. It is found that the (111) surface is the most stable among the considered surfaces, followed by (110) and (100) surfaces, in agreement with experimental observations and previous theoretical results. Different features of relaxation are found for the three surfaces. While the (111) surface undergoes very small relaxation, considerably larger relaxations are found for the (110) and (100) surfaces. The formation of an oxygen vacancy is closely related to the surface structure and occurs more easily for the (110) surface than for (111). The preferred vacancy location is in the surface layer for CeO2(110) and in the subsurface layer (the second O-atomic layer) for CeO2(111). For both surfaces, the O vacancy forms more readily than in the bulk. An interesting oscillatory behavior is found for the vacancy formation energy in the upper three layers of CeO2(111). Analysis of the reduced surfaces suggests that the additional charge resulting from the formation of the oxygen vacancies is localized in the first three layers of the surface. Furthermore, they are not only trapped in the 4f states of cerium.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".