A comparison of the magnetism of cobalt-, manganese-, and nickel-ferrite nanoparticles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The microstructure, composition and magnetism of CoFe 2 O 4 , MnFe 2 O 4 and NiFe 2 O 4 nanoparticles of comparable sizes (∼20 nm) and interparticle spacings (∼20 nm) have been characterized from 10 to 400 K. The cation distributions of the tetrahedral and octahedral sites of the particles, that have cubic spinel structures, have a high degree of inversion, ∼0.98 for CoFe 2 O 4 , ∼0.80 for MnFe 2 O 4 and NiFe 2 O 4 nanoparticles. The blocking temperatures were ∼300 K for the MnFe 2 O 4 and NiFe 2 O 4 nanoparticles, while the CoFe 2 O 4 nanoparticles, due to their higher intrinsic anisotropy had a significantly higher blocking temperature above 400 K. Specifically, the magnetocrystalline anisotropy of the CoFe 2 O 4 nanoparticles was <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"> <mml:mi>K</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo> <mml:mn>2.96</mml:mn> <mml:mo>±</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.03</mml:mn> <mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo> <mml:mo>×</mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mn>10</mml:mn> <mml:mn>6</mml:mn> </mml:msup> </mml:mstyle> </mml:math> ergs cm −3 , while for the MnFe 2 O 4 nanoparticles, <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"> <mml:mi>K</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.04</mml:mn> <mml:mo>±</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.01</mml:mn> <mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo> <mml:mo>×</mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mn>10</mml:mn> <mml:mn>6</mml:mn> </mml:msup> </mml:mstyle> </mml:math> ergs cm −3 , and for the NiFe 2 O 4 nanoparticles, <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"> <mml:mi>K</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.07</mml:mn> <mml:mo>±</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.01</mml:mn> <mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo> <mml:mo>×</mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mn>10</mml:mn> <mml:mn>6</mml:mn> </mml:msup> </mml:mstyle> </mml:math> ergs cm −3 . The magnetism of these three ferrite systems are discussed in detail with regards to their microstructures and cation distributions.
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".