Instabilities in the Linear Sb Atom Chain of the New Binary Antimonide Ti<sub>11</sub><sub>-</sub><i><sub>x</sub></i>Sb<sub>8</sub><sub>-</sub><i><sub>y</sub></i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The new binary antimonide Ti 11 - x Sb 8 - y was prepared from directly reacting the elements in stoichiometric ratios, either by melting the reaction mixture in an arc furnace or by annealing it in a resistance furnace above 1000 °C. Ti 11 - x Sb 8 - y is a nonstoichiometric compound with a small phase range that cannot be prepared with the idealized Ti:Sb ratio of 11:8. Ti 10.84(3) Sb 7.74(1) crystallizes in the Cr 11 Ge 8 type, isostructural with (Zr,V) 11 Sb 8: space group Pnma, lattice dimensions a = 1462.28(9) pm, b = 559.72(4) pm, c = 1764.4(1) pm, V = 1.4441(2) nm 3 ( Z = 4). One can describe this type as an intergrowth of distorted fragments of the NiAs and W 5 Si 3 types. In addition to the dominating heteronuclear Ti−Sb bonds, the structure of Ti 11 - x Sb 8 - y comprises several homonuclear Ti−Ti and Sb−Sb bonding interactions. Short bonds of alternating 276 and 284 pm occur in a linear nonclassical chain of mainly Sb atoms (i.e., 87% Sb and 13% Ti). According to our experiments, the incorporation of Ti atoms into this chain, which consists solely of Sb atoms with shorter interatomic distances than those in the ternary Zr−V antimonide, is necessary for the formation of this compound to balance the mismatch of bond length and strength in this chain.
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) | 0.002 | 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".