Atomistic modeling of thermo‐mechanical properties of cubic SiC
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 SiC is an important multifunctional material with application in electronics and as a structural material. Many investigations of SiC have been done using both classical molecular dynamics and first principles methods. However, they are of limited scope and, in particular, SiC properties at finite temperatures have not been adequately evaluated. The good mechanical, thermal, and chemical properties of SiC such as high stiffness, high hardness, high mechanical strength at high temperature, and high thermal conductivity, make SiC a candidate for various applications in nuclear industries. In this work, we evaluated thermomechanical properties at finite temperatures obtained by LAMMPS code with traditionally used Tersoff potential (TR89 with PRB 41 correction), and the newer GW 2002 (GW02) potential. We compared them with the calculations made using MEAM 1995 (MEAM 95) and with our first principles DFT predictions. It is demonstrated that the thermal expansion and mechanical properties calculated as a function of temperature for classical potentials TR89 and GW02 do not agree well with first principles calculations while better agreement is found for the MEAM95 potential. Classical molecular dynamics calculations made with the use of two earlier potentials under‐predict thermal conductivity by one order of magnitude for the TR89 potential and by more than 30% for the GW02.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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