Specific features of growth and structure of LiNbO3 : Zn crystals near the ZnO concentration threshold of 6.76 mol %
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The crystallization conditions and Raman spectra of LiNbO3 : Zn crystals (0.02–8.91 mol % ZnO in the melt) have been investigated. It has been established that the most favorable conditions for growing optically and compositionally homogeneous heavily doped LiNbO3 : Zn crystals, which are characterized by a low photorefractive effect, are implemented in the ZnO concentration range of ~4.0–6.76 mol % in the melt. Since the distribution coefficient K eff decreases significantly with an increase in the ZnO concentration in the melt, one can obtain LiNbO3 : Zn crystals with significantly different defect structures but identical zinc concentrations. A change in the zinc concentration in crystals has been shown to induce a stepwise change in the sequence order of the main (Li and Nb) and doping (Zn) cations and vacancies and stepwise anisotropic expansion of the oxygen octahedra along the polar axis. The number of kinks in the concentration behavior of the spectral-line widths (five kinks for the lines with frequencies of 630 (A 1(TO)) and 876 cm–1 (A 1(LO))) significantly exceeds the number of thresholds (two) known from the literature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".