Comment on “Rapid chemical and topological ordering in supercooled liquid Cu<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mrow/><mml:mn>46</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math>Zr<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mrow/><mml:mn>54</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math>”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In their recent publication, Wessels et al. [Phys. Rev. B 83, 094116 (2011)] present evidence of rapid ordering in a supercooled Cu${}_{46}$Zr${}_{54}$ liquid. A part of their supporting argument is based on an experimentally observed peak in the specific heat capacity of a Cu${}_{46}$Zr${}_{54}$ melt as a function of temperature. The experimental observations are supported by classical molecular dynamics (MD) simulations for which the phase trajectory is modeled using an embedded-atom model. We believe that (i) the hypothesis that has led to the determination of the specific heat capacity as a function of temperature, (ii) the MD general simulation procedure, and (iii) the interpretation of the experimental evidence are not fully justified, and this alters some of the conclusions of their paper.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.005 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".