Examination of Spinel and Nonspinel Structural Models for γ-Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub>by DFT and Rietveld Refinement Simulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the widespread use of gamma-Al2O3, there is still considerable disagreement over the nature of its structure due to both its poor crystallinity and differing preparation techniques during experimentation. Using density-functional theory (DFT) calculations and Rietveld simulations and refinement, the structure of three spinel-related models and a recently proposed nonspinel model were studied in reference to synchrotron X-ray powder diffraction (SXPD) patterns. The spinel-based structural models represent the structural features of gamma-Al2O3 better than the nonspinel model. The major failure of the nonspinel model is that the model cannot reproduce the SXPD reflection originating from tetrahedral aluminum. The Rietveld-refined spinel model can accurately reproduce the lattice parameters and other structural features of gamma-Al2O3, and it can generate a consistent diffraction peak at 2theta which lies between the splitting peaks of the experimental pattern that are originated from the disordered tetrahedral aluminum cations.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".