MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036987274 · doi:10.1063/1.481070

Structures and stability of CO layers on the MgO(001) surface

2000· article· en· W2036987274 on OpenAlexaff
A. K. Sallabi, D. B. Jack

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerpendicularPhase (matter)MoleculeCrystallographyIonPhase transitionMonte Carlo methodChemistryMaterials scienceCondensed matter physicsPhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monte Carlo simulations of CO/MgO(001) show that below 41 K the CO molecules form a c(4×2) structure with six molecules per unit cell distributed into two kinds of adsorption sites: a perpendicular site and a tilted site (polar angle of 31°). Both sites are localized near Mg2+ ions. The occupancy of perpendicular sites to tilted sites occurs in the ratio of 1:2. At 41 K the c(4×2) phase undergoes a phase transition into a less dense, disordered phase accompanied by the expulsion of some molecules to form a partial second layer. The density of the remaining disordered layer is the same as for a p(3×2) phase and portions of the disordered layer show regions of short range ordering with either the c(4×2) or p(3×2) structures. The p(3×2) phase contains four molecules per unit cell and also consists of perpendicular and tilted sites, but in the ratio of 1:1. This structure was found to be stable up to 50 K after which the expulsion of some molecules and disordering of the layer occurred. A model to test the relative stability of these two phases by examining the difference in Gibbs free energy is constructed and shows that below 41 K the c(4×2) phase is the most stable but above 41 K the p(3×2) phase is the most stable. However, at low pressures the model suggests that the p(3×2) phase will not be observed and the layer will instead transform from the c(4×2) phase to a disordered phase at 41 K. This result reconciles the findings of low-energy electron diffraction (LEED) experiments [p(3×2) phase observed] with those of helium atom scattering (HAS) and polarization infrared spectroscopy (PIRS) experiments (disordered phase observed). It is proposed that the c(4×2)→p(3×2) transition is part of an infinite sequence of transitions involving (n×2)-type structures which, under suitable conditions of temperature and pressure, constitutes an example of the devil’s staircase phenomenon. Such a phenomenon has been suggested by previous LEED experiments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, 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 venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207