Local polar structure and multiferroic properties of (1−<i>x</i>)Bi0.9Dy0.1FeO3−<i>x</i>PbTiO3 solid solution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The multiferroic (1–x)[0.9BiFeO3–0.1DyFeO3]–xPbTiO3 (BDF–xPT) solid solution with compositions around the morphotropic phase boundary (x = 0.25, 0.28, 0.31, 0.34, and 0.37) has been synthesized in the form of ceramics. The phase symmetry, microstructure, ferroelectricity, piezoresponse, and ferromagnetic properties have been characterized by various techniques. It is found that, with increasing content of lead titanate from x = 0.25 to x = 0.37, the grain size increases and the ferroelectric property is improved. The ferroelectric performance is further enhanced by the introduction of an excess amount (2%) of TiO2 or by sintering in oxygen atmosphere, which reduces the leakage. The local polar structure is imaged by piezoresponse force microscopy. Both the out-of-plane and in-plane images reveal distinct ferroelectric domain structures, with the amplitude and the average domain size decreasing with the increase of lead titanate amount. Compared with the (1–x)BiFeO3–xPbTiO3 binary solid solution of about the same concentration of PT, the magnetic properties are enhanced in BDF–xPT due to the presence of dysprosium, as demonstrated by the ferromagnetic hysteresis loops displayed at room temperature and at 10 K, but the remnant magnetization decreases with increasing PT content. The simultaneous presence of ferroelectricity and ferromagnetism entitles the BDF–xPT solid solution a room-temperature multiferroic material.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".