MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984285555 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.100.205201

<i>Ab initio</i>insight into the formation of small polarons: A study across four metal peroxides

2019· article· en· W2984285555 on OpenAlexafffund
Shuaishuai Yuan, Zi Wang, M. Barón, Kirk H. Bevan

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectronic and Structural Properties of Oxides
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsPolaronAb initioDiabaticCondensed matter physicsElectronic structureRelaxation (psychology)Ab initio quantum chemistry methodsElectronMaterials sciencePhysicsChemical physicsAdiabatic processQuantum mechanicsMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this ab initio study, we investigate the initial stages of small polaron formation across four metal peroxides. By separating out electronic and lattice energy contributions to the formation of electron polarons, we find both large and small formation barriers directly correlated with an electronic relaxation delay. Further analysis of the electronic structure evolution during polaron formation, within the constraints set by the generalized form of Koopmans' theorem, reveals that hybridization between the polaron anchoring orbital and the conduction band minimum determines the electronic relaxation delay. This hybridization physics is shown to play a dominant role in the magnitude of a polaron formation barrier and the adiabaticity of polaron charge localization. Weaker hybridization is correlated with larger more diabatic formation barriers, while stronger hybridization is correlated with smaller more adiabatic formation barriers. These ab initio insights may lead to new approaches towards tailoring the formation of small polarons in energy and electronic materials.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.316 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicElectronic and Structural Properties of OxidesFrench-language works237,207