Composition dependent band offsets of ZnO and its ternary alloys
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We report the calculated fundamental band gaps of wurtzite ternary alloys Zn 1− x M x O (M = Mg, Cd) and the band offsets of the ZnO/Zn 1− x M x O heterojunctions, these II-VI materials are important for electronics and optoelectronics. Our calculation is based on density functional theory within the linear muffin-tin orbital (LMTO) approach where the modified Becke-Johnson (MBJ) semi-local exchange is used to accurately produce the band gaps, and the coherent potential approximation (CPA) is applied to deal with configurational average for the ternary alloys. The combined LMTO-MBJ-CPA approach allows one to simultaneously determine both the conduction band and valence band offsets of the heterojunctions. The calculated band gap data of the ZnO alloys scale as E g = 3.35 + 2.33 x and E g = 3.36 − 2.33 x + 1.77 x 2 for Zn 1− x Mg x O and Zn 1− x Cd x O, respectively, where x being the impurity concentration. These scaling as well as the composition dependent band offsets are quantitatively compared to the available experimental data. The capability of predicting the band parameters and band alignments of ZnO and its ternary alloys with the LMTO-CPA-MBJ approach indicate the promising application of this method in the design of emerging electronics and optoelectronics.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it