MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of Adding Ag Nanoparticles onto Magnetic and Structural Properties of BSCCO Superconducting Compound

2021· article· en· W3145260567 on OpenAlexaff
Mustafa Q. Al Habeeb, Saad F. Oboudi, Wenlong Wu, S. R. Julian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceSuperconductivityGrain sizeAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Phase (matter)NanoparticleDiffractionMorphology (biology)NanotechnologyMetallurgyCondensed matter physicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Effect of adding silver nanoparticles on Bi 1.7 Pb 0.3 Sr 2 Ca 2 Cu 3 O 10+δ superconductor phase by solid state reaction technique. It was studied the significant variations in the superconducting, magnetic and structural properties of Bi-2223 phase. Ag NPs concentration of tiny particles varied, (0 - 1,25) % from the total weight mass of the BPSCCO compound were characterized by X-ray diffraction (XRD) and EDX spectrum measurements. It was found that adding Ag nanoparticles to BSCCO was enhanced the (Bi, Pb)-2223 phase formation up to x=1.25 wt%. On the other hand, the low concentrations of Ag nanoparticles of 0.25 wt% retarded the high-T c phase formation and (T c ) measured that had the maximum improvement in Tc for most samples. The surface morphology investigated were examined by SEM, which the grain size increased with an increase Ag NPs, while the grain size examination showed that both the size and number of voids were reduced. Magnetization variance was measured of the samples by M - T curve, where the highest value for x = 1.25 wt%, and it become clear when the magnetic and resistance transition points are close to each other. Moreover, Critical current density ( J c ) characteristic curves were measured at temperature range (2-150) K.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicPhysics of Superconductivity and MagnetismFrench-language works237,207