MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385009126 · doi:10.1016/j.calphad.2023.102589

Thermodynamic evaluation and optimization of the As–Co, As–Fe and As–Fe–S systems

2023· article· en· W4385009126 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCalphad · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRare-earth and actinide compounds
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsCALPHADLiquidusPhase diagramThermodynamicsGibbs free energyTernary operationSolid solutionBinary numberCobaltMaterials scienceFerromagnetismFormalism (music)Phase (matter)ChemistryMetallurgyPhysicsMathematicsComputer scienceAlloyCondensed matter physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A critical evaluation of all available phase diagram and thermodynamic data for the As–Co and As–Fe binary systems as well as the As–Fe–S ternary system has been performed and thermodynamic assessments over the whole composition ranges are presented using the CALPHAD method. To predict thermodynamic properties and phase equilibria for these systems, the Modified Quasichemical Model (MQM) for short range ordering was used for the liquid phases. The Compound Energy Formalism (CEF) was used for the solid solutions. Since Co and Fe are ferromagnetic, magnetic contributions were added to describe the Gibbs energy of cobalt and iron rich solid solutions. Important uncertainties remain for the liquidus of As-rich regions in the binary subsystems.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.748
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.265 · 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