MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135606865 · doi:10.1039/c4dt03203a

Electronic structure of β-RbSm(MoO<sub>4</sub>)<sub>2</sub>and chemical bonding in molybdates

2014· article· en· W2135606865 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDalton Transactions · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCrystal Structures and Properties
Canadian institutionsCytodiagnostics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemical bondChemistryCrystallographyElectronic structureMaterials scienceComputational chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microcrystals of orthorhombic rubidium samarium molybdate, β-RbSm(MoO4)2, have been fabricated by solid state synthesis at T = 450 °C, 70 h, and at T = 600 °C, 150 h. The crystal structure has been refined by the Rietveld method in space group Pbcn with cell parameters a = 5.0984(2), b = 18.9742(6) and c = 8.0449(3) Å (R(B) = 1.72%). Thermal properties of β-RbSm(MoO4)2 were traced by DSC over the temperature range of T = 20-965 °C, and the earlier reported β ↔ α phase transition at T ∼ 860-910 °C was not verified. The electronic structure of β-RbSm(MoO4)2 was studied by employing theoretical calculations and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. It has been established that the O 2p-like states contribute mainly to the upper part of the valence band and occupy the valence band maximum, whereas the Mo 4d-like states contribute mainly to the lower part of the valence band. Chemical bonding effects have been analysed from the element core level binding energy data. In addition, it was found that the luminescence spectrum of β-RbSm(MoO4)2 is rather peculiar among the Sm(3+) containing materials. The optical refractive index dispersion in β-RbSm(MoO4)2 was also predicted by the first-principles calculations.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.779

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.197 · 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