MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168508597 · doi:10.1021/ic0495113

Crystal Structure and Physical Properties of a New CuTi<sub>2</sub>S<sub>4</sub> Modification in Comparison to the Thiospinel

2004· article· en· W2168508597 on OpenAlexaff
Navid Soheilnia, Katja M. Kleinke, Enkhtsetseg Dashjav, Heather L. Cuthbert, John E. Greedan, Holger Kleinke

Bibliographic record

VenueInorganic Chemistry · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRare-earth and actinide compounds
Canadian institutionsBrockhouse Institute for Materials ResearchMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryCrystallographyOctahedronCrystal structureSpinelTetrahedronPauli exclusion principleLattice (music)Condensed matter physicsMaterials sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new modification of CuTi(2)S(4) was prepared from the elements at 425 degrees C. It crystallizes in the rhombohedral space group Rm, with lattice parameters of a = 7.0242(4) A, c = 34.834(4) A, and V = 1488.4(2) A(3) (Z = 12). Two topologically different interlayer regions exist between the close-packed S layers that alternate along the c axis: one comprises both Cu (in tetrahedral voids) and Ti atoms (in octahedral voids), and the second exclusively Ti atoms (again in octahedral voids). In contrast to the known modification, the spinel, Cu-Ti interactions of 2.88 A occur that have bonding character according to the electronic structure calculations. Both CuTi(2)S(4) modifications are metallic Pauli paramagnets due to Ti d contributions. The Pauli susceptibility of the Rm form is larger than that of the thiospinel in quantitative agreement with the LMTO-ASA band structure calculations. The irreversible transformation to the spinel takes place at temperatures above 450 degrees C.

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 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.681

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations32
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInorganic ChemistrySame topicRare-earth and actinide compoundsFrench-language works237,207