MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023325944 · doi:10.1524/zkri.2000.215.7.406

MgAl<sub>2</sub>O<sub>4</sub> synthetic spinel: cation and vacancy distribution as a function of temperature, from in situ neutron powder diffraction

2000· article· en· W2023325944 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alessandrο Pavese, Gilberto Artioli, A. Hoser

Bibliographic record

VenueZeitschrift für Kristallographie - Crystalline Materials · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicX-ray Diffraction in Crystallography
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsNeutron diffractionSpinelRietveld refinementAtmospheric temperature rangeVacancy defectPowder diffractionCrystallographyMaterials scienceDiffractionBond lengthAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryPhysical chemistryCrystal structureThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neutron powder diffraction data collection has been carried out at BENSC (Berlin, D), on synthetic Mg0.94Al2.04O4 spinel, in the temperature range 300-1700 K, to investigate the intracrystalline cation and vacancy order-disorder (OD) reaction, which begins to be detectable at 944 K. The Rietveld method has been used in combination with advanced minimization techniques to determine the occupancy coefficients of magnesium, aluminum, and vacancies on the tetrahedral and octohedral sites. The temperature dependence of the cell parameter, of the T-O and M-O bond lengths, and of the oxygen u-coordinate are discussed in the light of the OD-reactions. The cation site partitioning has been interpreted as a function of temperature using the thermodynamic model of O´Neill and Navrotsky, whose parameters [α=30(2) and β=1(3) kJ/mol]are compared with earlier determinations from literature.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 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

Citations19
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZeitschrift für Kristallographie - Crystalline MaterialsSame topicX-ray Diffraction in CrystallographyFrench-language works237,207