Extrinsic origin of the insulating behavior of polygrain icosahedral<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>Al</mml:mi><mml:mtext>−</mml:mtext><mml:mi>Pd</mml:mi><mml:mtext>−</mml:mtext><mml:mi>Re</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math>quasicrystals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polygrain icosahedral $i\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Al}\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Pd}\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Re}$ quasicrystals are known to exhibit dramatically different electronic transport properties to other Al-based quasicrystals. By performing comparative experimental and theoretical studies of the electronic transport and electronic structure of polygrain and monocrystalline $i\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Al}\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Pd}\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Re}$ samples, we show that the extraordinarily high electrical resistivity and the metal-to-insulator transition in the polygrain material are not intrinsic properties of the quasiperiodic lattice, but are of extrinsic origin due to the high porosity and the oxygen-rich weakly insulating regions in the material. We also compare theoretical electronic structures and experimental electrical resistivities of monocrystalline $i\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Al}\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Pd}\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Re}$ and $i\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Al}\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Pd}\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Mn}$ quasicrystals and show that there are no significant differences between these two isomorphous compounds, suggesting that $i\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Al}\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Pd}\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Re}$ is on common ground with other Al-based quasicrystals. We present a structural model of $i\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Al}\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Pd}\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{Re}$.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".