MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323244528 · doi:10.1149/1.2729345

Effect of Sintering Aids on the Formation of Zirconia-Ceria Solid Solution

2007· article· en· W2323244528 on OpenAlexaff
Cyrille Decès-Petit, Xinge Zhang, Radenka Marić

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Transactions · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCatalytic Processes in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsBC Innovation CouncilNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSinteringMaterials scienceYttria-stabilized zirconiaCubic zirconiaPhase (matter)CobaltChemical engineeringSamariumCopperOxideSolid oxide fuel cellSolid solutionElectrolyteShrinkageDegree (music)DopingMetallurgyInorganic chemistryComposite materialCeramicChemistryPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bi-layers electrolytes have been envisioned as a solution to improve fuel efficiency of ceria based materials for solid oxide fuel cells operating at intermediate temperature, but performance could be degraded if interface reaction occurs. In the present work, interactions between Samarium Doped Ceria (SDC) and Yttria or Scandia Stabilized Zirconia (YSZ or SSZ) were investigated. A new phase was observed on the XRD pattern for each mixture. On SDC-YSZ mixture, the new phase was completely formed at 1300{degree sign}C, with further shrinkage observed when temperature increased to 1400{degree sign}C. Adding the sintering aids such as Copper or Cobalt significantly decreased the sintering temperature of the mixtures, and it also decreased the temperature from which the new phase appears. The new phase appeared at 1100{degree sign}C with Copper and at 1200{degree sign}C with Cobalt.

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS TransactionsSame topicCatalytic Processes in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207