Coupled experimental phase diagram study and thermodynamic optimization of the Li <sub>2</sub> O–MgO–SiO <sub>2</sub> system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A coupled key phase diagram study and critical evaluation and optimization of all available experimental data of the Li 2 O–MgO–SiO 2 system was performed to obtain a set of Gibbs energy functions to reproduce all the reliable phase equilibria and thermodynamic data. Differential scanning calorimetry measurements and equilibration/quenching experiments were performed in the Li 2 SiO 3 –MgO and Li 4 SiO 4 –Mg 2 SiO 4 sections, respectively, using sealed Pt capsules to prevent the volatile loss of Li. According to the present experimental results, Li 2 MgSiO 4 is the only compound present in the Li 4 SiO 4 –Mg 2 SiO 4 isopleth, which shows a peritectic melting at 1465 ± 6°C (1738 ± 6 K). The Modified Quasichemical Model, which considers short‐range ordering in the melt, was employed to describe the thermodynamic properties of the liquid phase. The Li 4 SiO 4 –Li 2 MgSiO 4 and Mg 2 SiO 4 ‐rich solid solutions were modeled using the Compound Energy Formalism.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".