MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Mössbauer effect study of single crystals of the non-superconducting parent compound Fe<sub>1.09</sub>Te and the superconductor FeSe<sub>0.4</sub>Te<sub>0.6</sub>

2013· article· en· W2094690508 on OpenAlexafffund
Z. M. Stadnik, Pu Wang, J. Żukrowski, Takashi Noji, Yōji Koike

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Condensed Matter · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicIron-based superconductors research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAntiferromagnetismSuperconductivityCondensed matter physicsMaterials scienceQuadrupoleDebye modelMössbauer spectroscopyMagnetic momentCrystallographyPhysicsChemistryAtomic physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The results of a (57)Fe Mössbauer spectroscopy study between 2.0 and 297 K of the parent compound Fe1.09Te and the superconductor FeSe0.4Te0.6 are reported. It is shown that in both compounds the magnitude of the quadrupole splitting increases with decreasing temperature and is well described by a T(3/2) power-law relation. The presence of incommensurate spin-density-wave antiferromagnetism in Fe1.09Te is demonstrated, with the Néel temperature T(N) = 71.1(6) K. A theoretical prediction (Zhang et al 2009 Phys. Rev. B 79 012506) of the Fe magnetic moment at the 2c sites being significantly larger than that at the 2a sites in the parent compound is confirmed experimentally by showing that these moments at 4.4 K are, respectively, 3.20(4) and 1.78(3) μ(B). The absence of magnetic order in FeSe0.4Te0.6 down to 2.0 K is confirmed. The Debye temperatures of Fe1.09Te and FeSe0.4Te0.6 are found to be 290(1) and 233(1) K, respectively.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Condensed MatterSame topicIron-based superconductors researchFrench-language works237,207