MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064618095 · doi:10.1139/p08-081

Paramagnetic Ge–Li centres in alpha quartz revisited: The D<sub>Li</sub>([GeO<sub>4</sub>/Li]<sup>0</sup><sub>D</sub>) centre

2008· article· en· W2064618095 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
R.F.C. Claridge, O. Kryliouk, John A. Weil, James Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGlass properties and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNew Zealand GovernmentUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Canterbury
KeywordsElectron paramagnetic resonanceParamagnetismHyperfine structurePhysicsIonInterstitial defectCrystallographyAtomic physicsSpectroscopyNuclear magnetic resonanceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Condensed matter physicsChemistryDoping

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A previously unreported stable paramagnetic defect centre in single-crystal alpha-quartz has been studied by quantitative X-band electron paramagnetic resonance spectroscopy at 15, 100, and 296 K, and is shown to contain a Ge 3+ ion, presumably located substitutional for Si 4+ , with a nearby interstitial Li + ion. The centre, called D Li herein, grows in slowly (months) after room-temperature x-irradiation and storage. Hyperfine structure arising from 73 Ge, 7 Li, and 29 Si has been observed. The spin-Hamiltonian parameter matrices g, A( 7 Li), A( 73 Ge), and P( 73 Ge) are reported, also for centre C Li . A thermal dynamic process, probably involving Li + hopping, begins to be appreciable above 100 K. Discussion of D Li , its apparent growth from another paramagnetic centre (not yet fully characterized), and comparison with other similar defects is included.PACS Nos.: 42.70.Ce, 61.72.Hh, 61.72–y, 61.72S–, 61.72uf, 61.80–x, 76.30–v, 76.30.Mi

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.199
Teacher spread0.184 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicGlass properties and applicationsFrench-language works237,207