MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023871718 · doi:10.1021/cm051989x

Ab Initio Simulation of Si-Doped Hydroxyapatite

2005· article· ceb· W2023871718 on OpenAlexaff
R. Astala, Lázaro Calderín, Xinmao Yin, M. J. Stott

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry of Materials · 2005
Typearticle
Languageceb
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVacancy defectAb initioMaterials scienceDopingPartial chargeAb initio quantum chemistry methodsHydrogenIonChemical physicsChemistryCrystallographyMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Si-doped hydroxyapatite is a bioceramic useful as a bone repair material retaining the hexagonal structure of hydroxyapatite up to about 2 wt % Si. Different mechanisms for charge compensation for the SiO 4 4 - ion substituting for the PO 4 3 - have been proposed. Also, variations are reported in the dependence of the lattice parameters on the Si doping. These may be a result of different charge compensation mechanisms which may in turn depend on the method of preparation of the material. Calculation using ab initio total energy methods have been performed to investigate different mechanisms for charge compensation in Si-doped hydroxyapatite. Mechanisms involving an OH vacancy, an oxygen vacancy, and an additional hydrogen are studied. These mechanisms correspond to different degrees of dehydration and, consequently, depend on water partial pressure and chemical potential. Full relaxation of the atomic positions and the unit cell parameters was performed, and ground-state energies of the equilibrium structures, equilibrium lattice parameters, and atomic arrangements were obtained. The results indicate that which charge compensation mechanism is stable depends on the chemical potential of water. For small values of the water chemical potential the mechanism involving an OH vacancy is stable, but for larger values the mechanism leading to the formation of HSiO 4 is stable. The other mechanisms considered are unstable.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations59
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistry of MaterialsSame topicBone Tissue Engineering MaterialsFrench-language works237,207