MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249467257 · doi:10.3139/146.110433

Experimental investigation of the Zn–Fe–V system at 450°C

2010· article· en· W4249467257 on OpenAlexaff
Changjun Wu, Xuping Su, Daniel Liu, Xinming Wang, Fucheng Yin, Zhongxi Zhu, Zhi Li

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Materials Research (formerly Zeitschrift fuer Metallkunde) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSemiconductor materials and interfaces
Canadian institutionsTeck (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsothermal processMaterials scienceSolubilityScanning electron microscopeAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ZincTernary numeral systemEnergy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopyTernary operationPhase diagramSpectroscopyDiffractionTernary compoundCrystallographyNuclear chemistryPhase (matter)Physical chemistryInorganic chemistryMetallurgyThermodynamicsChemistryChromatographyComposite materialOrganic chemistryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The 450°C isothermal section of the ZnüFeüV ternary phase diagram has been determined experimentally using X-ray diffraction and scanning electron microscopy coupled with energy/wave dispersive spectroscopy. A new ternary compound T, containing 1.4 to 4.5 at.% V, 5.6 to 15.5 at.% Fe and 82.3 to 92.2 at.% Zn, was positively identified for the first time in this study. The existence of the rphase, together with two ZnüV compounds, VZn3 and V4Zn5, at 450°C has been confirmed. Fe has no detectable solubility in ZnüV compounds. But it was proved that about 3.0 at.% Zn can dissolve into α-V at 450°C. Experimental results indicated that the maximum solubility of V in d, γ1, and γ was 0.5 at.%, 1.3 at.% and 1.8 at.% respectively, whereas that in ζ was less than 0.2 at.%.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations7
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Materials Research (formerly Zeitschrift fuer Metallkunde)Same topicSemiconductor materials and interfacesFrench-language works237,207