MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2388520772

Synthesis and luminescent properties of Ca_8MgY(PO_4)_7:Re~(3+)(Re~(3+)=Eu~(3+),Ce~(3+),Tb~(3+)) phosphors

2014· article· en· W2388520772 on OpenAlexaff
Cao Jing-jin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Functional Biomaterials · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicLuminescence Properties of Advanced Materials
Canadian institutionsScience North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhosphorMaterials scienceDopingUltravioletIrradiationAnalytical Chemistry (journal)LuminescenceNuclear chemistryEmission intensityEmission spectrumSpectral lineChemistryOptoelectronics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

β-Ca3(PO4)2 structured Ca8MgY(PO4)7∶Re3+(Re3+=Eu3+,Ce3+,Tb3+)has been prepared by solid state method.The results of XRD,FT-IR,and TG-DSC characterization indicated that the optimum synthesis temperature was at 1 200℃.PL characterization indicated that under 252nm ultraviolet irradiation,Ca8MgY(PO4)7∶Eu3+ phosphor showed the characteristic emission of Eu3+,dominated by the emission at 612nm,which was ascribed to 5 D0-7 F2 transition of Eu3+,the optimum doping concentration of Eu3+ was 5.0mol%.Under 295nm ultraviolet irradiation,Ca8MgY(PO4)7∶Ce3+ phosphor showed a band emission with maximum at 363nm,which was originated from 5d1-4f1 transition of Ce3+,the optimum doping concentration of Ce3+ was 1.0mol%.Under the irradiation of ultraviolet at 228nm,the emission of Ca8MgY(PO4)7∶Tb3+ was dominated by blue emission ascribed to 5D3-7FJat lower doping concentration,while at higher concentration,the emission was dominated by green emission ascribed to 5D4-7FJ.This phenomenon was due to the crossing-relaxation of Tb3+.The optimum doping concentration of Tb3+ was 7.0mol%.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Functional BiomaterialsSame topicLuminescence Properties of Advanced MaterialsFrench-language works237,207