Temperature dependence of the complete material coefficients matrix of soft and hard doped piezoelectric lead zirconate titanate ceramics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have used resonance methods to determine the variation of all the independent piezoelectric, elastic, and dielectric material coefficients, as well as the corresponding electromechanical coupling factors, of soft and hard doped piezoelectric lead zirconate titanate (PZT) ceramics with compositions near the morphotropic phase boundary, as a function of temperature ranging between −165 and 195°C. The material coefficients were obtained by analyzing the fundamental resonance of the impedance or admittance spectra as a function of frequency for several sample resonance geometries. The piezoelectric coefficients d33, −d31, and d15, as well as the dielectric permittivity coefficients ε11T and ε33T, generally increased with temperature for both soft and hard PZT samples. However, the elastic compliance coefficients s11E, −s12E, s33E, and s55E exhibited abnormal variations seen as broad peaks over parts of the tested temperature range. Additionally, thermal hystereses were observed in all the studied material coefficients over the temperature cycle. Finally, it was noted that, overall, the material coefficients of soft PZT varied significantly more than those of hard PZT under changing temperature conditions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".