MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315903478 · doi:10.1111/jace.14116

Effects of Heat‐Treatment Temperature on the Properties of (1– <i>x</i> )(Na <sub>0.5</sub> Bi <sub>0.5</sub> )TiO <sub>3</sub> – <i>x</i> BiAlO <sub>3</sub> Lead‐Free Piezoelectric Thin Films

2016· article· en· W2315903478 on OpenAlexafffund
Yunqiang Yao, Xiaoqing Wu, Peng Shi, Zuo‐Guang Ye

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Ceramic Society · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicFerroelectric and Piezoelectric Materials
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials sciencePolingDielectricPiezoelectricityBismuthFerroelectricityDissipation factorLead zirconate titanateAnnealing (glass)Piezoelectric coefficientDielectric lossComposite materialCeramicAnalytical Chemistry (journal)MineralogyOptoelectronicsMetallurgyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lead‐free sodium bismuth titanate–aluminate bismuth [0.97(Na 0.5 Bi 0.5 )TiO 3 –0.03BiAlO 3 ] solid‐solution films deposited on (100) Pt/TiO 2 /SiO 2 /Si substrates by a sol–gel process were pyrolyzed and annealed at different temperatures. The film annealed at 725°C with a pyrolysis temperature of 410°C exhibited the optimal electrical properties and excellent piezoelectric properties, with a remanent polarization 2 P r of 38 μC/cm 2 and a leakage current density of 10 −7 –10 −6 A/cm 2 ( E < 200 kV/cm). The values of the dielectric constant and dissipation factor at 100 kHz were 422 and 0.039, respectively. The piezoelectric coefficient of the film after poling at 168 kV/cm was found to be 57 pm/V, making the BNT ‐ BA films a viable lead‐free alternative to the lead‐based materials in such as biosensors and ultrasonic transducers.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Ceramic SocietySame topicFerroelectric and Piezoelectric MaterialsFrench-language works237,207