MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136418438 · doi:10.1107/s0021889802006027

<i>Ab</i><i>initio</i>modelling of intermetallics with CuAl<sub>2</sub>structure type: computed powder patterns from cell-and-type CRYSTMET entries

2002· article· en· W2136418438 on OpenAlexaff
Y. Le Page, John R. Rodgers, Peter S. White

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Crystallography · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicX-ray Diffraction in Crystallography
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAb initioCrystallographyType (biology)Ab initio quantum chemistry methodsChemistryPowder diffractionIntermetallicDiffractionMaterials sciencePhysicsMoleculeQuantum mechanicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Searchable calculated powder patterns of crystalline substances are commonly used nowadays to complement experimental patterns for the identification of materials by diffraction methods. Reliable such patterns are often calculable from the known cell, type and chemistry data on types with fixed Wyckoff positions, like NaCl, but not on typeC16 ofAB2compounds, with CuAl2as its representative material, because of the variablexcoordinate of itsBsite.Ab initiocell and coordinate relaxation for four key compounds withC16 type, all started from the samec/a= 1 andx= 1/6 configuration, converged on the correct axial ratios and fractional coordinates. A linear regression on a plot ofxcoordinates optimizedab initioat experimental cell dataversusX-ray coordinates for all 48C16-type compositions for pure-phase compounds with coordinates in the CRYSTMET database gavey= 0.998x,R2= 0.88. Credible calculated powder patterns were then produced for AlHf2, AlZr2, AuTl2, BCr2, GaHf2, IrZr2and TlTh2, all with cell, type and pure-phase composition information but no coordinates in this database, using their X-ray cell data andab initiocoordinates. Those patterns, now inserted in the search system of the database, will help users identify those phases from powder diffraction angle and intensity data. The corresponding entries in a new `X-ray cell-and-type,ab initiocoordinates' category of full structure entries may be helpful for other applications, such as the simulation of EXAFS spectra or of backscattered electron patterns.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.194
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied CrystallographySame topicX-ray Diffraction in CrystallographyFrench-language works237,207