Synthesis, Crystal Structure, and Electronic Properties of the CaRE<sub>3</sub>SbO<sub>4</sub> and Ca<sub>2</sub>RE<sub>8</sub>Sb<sub>3</sub>O<sub>10</sub> phases (RE = Rare-Earth Metal)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through high temperature synthesis at 1300 °C and above, our group has discovered and characterized the novel CaRE 3 SbO 4 and Ca 2 RE 8 Sb 3 O 10 phases (RE = Ce–Nd, Sm–Dy for CaRE 3 SbO 4, RE = La–Nd, Sm–Dy for Ca 2 RE 8 Sb 3 O 10 ). This result was motivated by the idea of opening a band gap and introducing structural complexity in the rare-earth antimonide framework by incorporation of rare-earth oxide and calcium oxide. The CaRE 3 SbO 4 phases adopt the tetragonal I 4/ m symmetry while the Ca 2 RE 8 Sb 3 O 10 ones adopt the monoclinic C 2/ m symmetry. These structures show many similarities to the other RE–Sb–O phases discovered recently, particularly to the RE 3 SbO 3 and RE 8 Sb 3 O 8 phases, in which a prolonged heat treatment results in one structure converting to another by elongation of the rare-earth oxide slabs. Electrical resistivity measurements yielded semiconducting properties for both series, despite the unbalanced electron count for Ca 2 RE 8 Sb 3 O 10 and electronic structure calculations that support metallic-type conduction. This unusual behavior is attributed to Anderson-type localization of Sb p states near the Fermi level, which arises from the highly disordered Sb layers in the structure. This Sb disorder was shown to be tunable with respect to the size of the rare-earth used, improving the electrical resistivity by approximately 1 order of magnitude for each rare-earth in the series.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".