Evolution of magnetic order in multiferroic Pb(Fe <sub>2/3</sub> W <sub>1/3</sub> )O <sub>3</sub> ‐BiFeO <sub>3</sub> solid solution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Multiferroic materials have attracted much interest in the last decade due to both the intriguing fundamental science and the potential applications in spintronics and magnetoelectric data storage devices. In this work, we have investigated and discussed the evolution of the magnetic properties of the multiferroic (1‐ x )Pb(Fe 2/3 W 1/3 )O 3 ‐ x BiFeO 3 solid solution ((1‐ x )PFW‐ x BFO, x = 0, 0.025, 0.05, 0.075, 0.1 and 0.15). The magnetic phase diagram is established based on the magnetic measurement results, which reveals six magnetically ordered states on the PFW‐rich side of the solid solution. The origins of the complex evolution of magnetic order in the PFW‐BFO solid solution are discussed from the point view of the variations in both the –Fe–O–Fe– and –Fe–O–W–O–Fe– superexchange routes, which are intimately related to the ratio of magnetic Fe 3+ ion concentration on the B‐site and the changes in the local structural order/disorder and chemical homogeneities. Combining the magnetic phase diagram with the relaxor characteristic phase diagram of the (1‐ x )PFW‐ x BFO system, a striking feature is found that the ergodic relaxor (ER) state and the weakly ferromagnetic phase coexist in the composition range of 0.025 ≤ x ≤ 0.1 between the freezing temperature T f and the Burns temperature T B .
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".