MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041293173 · doi:10.17308/kcmf.2020.22/2835

Исследование квазитройной системы FeS–Ga2S3–Ag2S по разрезу FeGa2S4–AgGaS2

2020· article· ru· W3041293173 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sharafat H. Mammadov

Bibliographic record

VenueКонденсированные среды и межфазные границы · 2020
Typearticle
Languageru
FieldEngineering
TopicChalcogenide Semiconductor Thin Films
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryMaterials scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Интерес к изучению систем, содержащих сульфиды формулой АIВIIIСVI2, обусловлен, прежде всего, открывающимися возможностями их практического использования в изготовлении нелинейных оптических приборов, детекторов, солнечных батарей, фотодиодов, люминофоров и др. Поэтому в связи с поиском новых перспективных материаловна основе тиогаллата серебра и железа целью этой работы является исследование квазибинарного разреза FeGa2S4–AgGaS2 четырехкомпонентной системы Fe–Ag–Ga–S.Синтез сплавов системы AgGaS2–FeGa2S4 проводили из лигатур с использованием высокой чистоты: железа – 99.995 %, галлия – 99.999 %, серебра – 99.99 % и серы – 99.99 %. Исследование сплавов проводили методами дифференциально-термического, рентгенофазового, микроструктурного анализов, а также измерением микротвердости и определениемплотности.Методами физико-химического анализа впервые изучена и построена Т-x фазовая диаграмма разреза AgGaS2–FeGa2S4, который является внутренним сечением квазитройной системы FeS–Ga2S3–Ag2S. Установлено, что система относится к простому эвтектическому типу. Состав эвтектической точки: 56 мол. % FeGa2S4 и Т = 1100 К. На основе исходных компонентов были определены области твердых растворов. Растворимость на основе FeGa2S4 и AgGaS2 при эвтектической температуре достигает до 10 и 16 мол. % соответственно. С уменьшением температуры твердые растворы сужаются и при комнатной температуре составляют на основе тиогаллата железа (FeGa2S4) 4 мол. % AgGaS2,а на основе тиогаллата серебра (AgGaS2) 11 мол. % FeGa2S4. ЛИТЕРАТУРА 1. Zhаo B., Zhu S., Li Z., Yu F., Zhu X., Gao D. Growth of AgGaS2 single crystal by descending cruciblewith rotation method and observation of properties. Chinese Sci. Bull. 2001; 46(23): 2009–2013. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/BF029019182. Горюнова Н. А. Сложные алмазоподобные полупроводники. М.: Сов. радио; 1968. 215 с.3. Абрикосов Н. Х., Шелимова Л. Е. Полупроводниковые материалы на основе соединений АIVBVI..М.:Наука; 1975. 195 с.4. Kushwaha A. K., Khenata R., Bouhemadou A., Bin-Omran S., Haddadi K. Lattice dynamical propertiesand elastic constants of the ternary chalcopyrite compounds CuAlS2, CuGaS2, CuInS2, and AgGaS2. Journalof Electronic Materials. 2017;46(7): 4109–4118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11664-017-5290-65. Uematsu T., Doi T., Torimoto T., Kuwabata S. Preparation of luminescent AgInS2-AgGaS2 solid solutionnanoparticles and their optical properties. The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters. 2010;1(22):3283–3287. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/jz101295w6. Karaagac H., Parlak M. The investigation of structural, electrical, and optical properties of thermalevaporated AgGaS2 thin films. J. Thin Solid Films. 2011;519(7): 2055–2061. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsf.2010.10.0277. Karunagaran N., Ramasamy P. Synthesis, growth and physical properties of silver gallium sulfi de singlecrystals. Materials Science in Semiconductor Processing. 2016;41: 54–58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mssp.2015.08.0128. Zhou H., Xiong L., Chen L., Wu L. Dislocations that decrease size mismatch within the lattice leadingto ultrawide band gap, large second-order susceptibility, and high nonlinear optical performance of AgGaS2.Angewandte Chemie International Edition. 2019;58(29): 9979–9983. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.2019039769. Li G., Chu Y., Zhou Z. From AgGaS2 to Li2ZnSiS4: Realizing impressive high laser damage thresholdtogether with large second-harmonic generation response. Journal Chemistry of Materials. 2018;30(3):602–606. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemmater.7b0535010. Yang J., Fan Q., Yu Y., Zhang W. Pressure effect of the vibrational and thermodynamic properties ofchalcopyrite-type compound AgGaS2: A fi rst-principles investigation. Journal Materials. 2018;11(12): 2370.DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ma1112237011. Paderick S., Kessler M., Hurlburt T. J., Hughes S. M. Synthesis and characterization of AgGaS2nanoparticles: a study of growth and fl uorescence. Journal Chemical Communications. 2018;54(1): 62–65.DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/C7CC08070K12. Kato K., Okamoto T., Grechin S., Umemura N. New sellmeier and thermo-optic dispersion formulasfor AgGaS2. Journal Crystals. 2019;9(3): 129–135. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/cryst903012913. Li W., Li Y., Xu Y., Lu J., Wang P., Du J., Leng Y. Measurements of nonlinear refraction in the mid-infraredmaterials ZnGeP2 and AgGaS2. Journal Applied Physics B. 2017;123(3). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00340-017-6643-914. Jahangirova S. K., Mammadov Sh. H., Ajdarova D. S., Aliyev O. M., Gurbanov G. R. Investigation ofthe AgGaS2–PbS and some properties of phases of variable composition. Russian Journal of InorganicChemistry. 2019;64(9): 1169–1171. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S003602361909009215. Asadov S. M., Mustafaeva S. N., Guseinov D. T. X-ray dosimetric characteristics of AgGaS2 singlecrystals grown by chemical vapor transport. Inorganic Materials. 2017;53(5): 457–461. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S002016851705002816. Mys O., Adamenko D., Skab I., Vlokh R. Anisotropy of acousto-optic fi gure of merit for the collineardiffraction of circularly polarized optical waves at the wavelength of isotropic point in AgGaS2 crystals.Ukrainian Journal of Physical Optics. 2019;20(2): 73–80.DOI: https://doi.org/10.3116/16091833/20/2/73/20117. Karunagaran N., Ramasamy P. Investigation on synthesis, growth, structure and physical propertiesof AgGa0.5In0.5S2 single crystals for Mid-IR application. Journal of Crystal Growth. 2018;483: 169–174.DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2017.11.03018. Ranmohotti K. G. S., Djieutedjeu H., Lopez J., Page A., Haldolaarachchige N., Chi H., Sahoo P., Uher C.,Young D., Poudeu P. F. P. Coexistence of high-Tc ferromagnetism and n-type electrical conductivity inFeBi2Se4. J. of the American Chemical Society. 2015;137(2): 691–698. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/ja508425519. Karthikeyan N., Aravindsamy G., Balamurugan P., Sivakumar K. Thermoelectric properties of layeredtype FeIn2Se4 chalcogenide compound. Materials Research Innovations. 2018;22(5): 278–281. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/14328917.2017.131488220. Nakafsuji S., Tonomura H., Onuma K., Nambu Y., Sakai O., Maeno Y., Macaluso R. T., Chan J. Y.Spin disorder and order in quasi-2D triangular Heisenberg antiferromagnets: comparative study ofFeGa2S4, Fe2Ga2S5 and NiGa2S4. Phys. Rev. Letters. 2007;99(1–4): 157–203. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.15720321. Rushchanskii K. Z., Haeuseler H., Bercha D. M. Band structure calculations on the layered compoundsFeGa2S4 and NiGa2S4. J. Phys. Chem. Solids. 2002;63(11): 2019–2028. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3697(02)00188-922. Dalmas de Reotier P., Yaouanc A., MacLaughlin D. E., Songrui Zhao. Evidence for an exotic magnetictransition in the triangular spin system FeGa2S4. J. Phys. Rev. B. 2012;85(14): 140407.1–140407.5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevb.85.14040723. Myoung B. R., Lim J. T., Kim C. S. Investigation of magnetic properties on spin-ordering effects ofFeGa2S4 and FeIn2S4. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials. 2017;438: 121–125. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmmm.2017.04.05624. Asadov M. M., Mustafaeva S. N., Hasanova U. A., Mamedov F. M., Aliev O. M., Yanushkevich K. I., NikitovS. A., Kuli-Zade E. S. Thermodynamics of FeS–PbS–In2S3 and properties of intermediate phases. JournalDefect and Diffusion Forum.2018;385: 175–181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/DDF.385.17525. Li K., Yuan D., Shen S., Guo J. Crystal structures and property characterization of two magneticfrustration compounds. Journal Powder Diffraction. 2018;33(3): 190–194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S088571561800050726. Chen B., Zhu S., Zhao B., Lei Y., Wu X., Yuan Z., He Z. Differential thermal analysis and crystal growthof AgGaS2. Journal of Crystal Growth. 2008;310(3): 635–638. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2007.10.06727. Sinyakova E. F., Kosyakov V. I., Kokh K. A. Oriented crystallization of AgGaS2 from the melt systemAg–Ga–S. J. Inorganic Materials. 2009;45(11): 1217–1221. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S002016850911004128. Chykhrij S. I., Parasyuk O. V., Halka V. O. Crystal structure of the new quaternary phase AgCd2GaS4and phase diagram of the quasibinary system AgGaS2–CdS. Journal of Alloys and Compounds.2000;312(1–2):189–195. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-8388(00)01145-229. Olekseyuk I. D., Parasyuk O. V., Halka V. O., Piskach L. V. F., Pankevych V. Z. Romanyuk Ya. E. Phaseequilibria in the quasi-ternary system Ag2S–CdS–Ga2S3. J. Alloys and compounds. 2001;325(10): 167–179. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-8388(01)01361-530. Brand G., Kramer V. Phase equilibrium in the quasi-binary system Ag2S–Ga2S3. Mater. Res. Bull.1976;11(11): 1381–1388. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5408(76)90049-031. Лазарев В. Б., Киш З. З., Переш Е. Ю., Семрад Е. Е. Сложные халькогениды в системе Аэ–Вэээ–СVI. М.: Металлургия; 1993. 229 с.32. Угай Я. А. Введение в химию полупроводников.М.: Высшая школа; 1975. 302 с.33. Pardo M. E, Dogguy-Smiri L., Flahaut J., Nguyen H. D. System Ga2S3–FeS Diagramme dephase — etude cristallographique. Mater. Res. Bull. 1981;16(11): 1375–1384. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5408(81)90056-834. Wintenberger M. About the unit cells and crystal structures of ~MGa2X4 (M = Mn, Fe, Co; X = S,Se) and ZnAI2S4 Type. In: Proc. VII Int. Conf. on Solid Compounds of Transition Elements, CNRS. Grenoble,France: IA 14/1-3, 1983.35. Rustamov P. G., Babaeva P. K., Azhdarova D. S., Askerova N. A., Ailazov M. R. Nature of interaction inMn(Fe,Co,Ni)–Ga(In)–S(Se) ternary systems. Azerb. Khim. Zh. 1984;15: 101–103.36. Raghavan V. Fe-Ga-S (Iron-Gallium-Sulfur). J. Phase Equil. 1998;19: 267–268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1361/10549719877034231937. Ueno T., Scott S. D. Phase relations in the Ga-Fe-S system at 900 and 800 C. The Canadian Mineralogist.2002;40(2): 568–570. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2113/gscanmin.40.2.56338. Allazov M. R. The system of FeS–GaS–S. Bulletin of Baku State University. 2009;(2): 42-47. Реж

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueКонденсированные среды и межфазные границыSame topicChalcogenide Semiconductor Thin FilmsFrench-language works237,207