The Layered Oxyselenide BiCuSeO Has Garnered Significant Interest Because of Its Ability to Exhibit Low Thermal Conductivity and a High Seebeck Coefficient. This Study Involved the Preparation of Bi1−xNaxCuSeO1−xFx(x=0, 0.05, 0.10, 0.15, and 0.20) Ceramic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The layered oxyselenide BiCuSeO has garnered significant interest because of its ability to exhibit low thermal conductivity and a high Seebeck coefficient. This study involved the preparation of Bi1−xNaxCuSeO1−xFx(x=0, 0.05, 0.10, 0.15, and 0.20) ceramics through the processes of high energy ball milling and cold isostatic pressing. A systematic study was conducted to investigate the impact of co−doping Na/F on the thermoelectric performance of BiCuSeO ceramics. Replacing Bi3+ with Na+ results in the introduction of a considerable amount of holes, leading to a notable enhancement in the electrical conductivity and power factor. The conductivity was significantly increased from 9.10 S cm−1 in the pure BiCuSeO to 94.5 S cm−1 in Bi0.85Na0.15CuSeO0.85F0.15 at 323 K. At 823 K, the power factor of the Bi0.85Na0.15CuSeO0.85F0.15 sample achieved 44.8×10−5 W/ m K2. Moreover, the Bi1−xNaxCuSeO1−xFx ceramics exhibit a minimum thermal conductivity of 0.43 W m−1 K−1. As a result, the Bi0.85Na0.15CuSeO0.85F0.15 sample achieves a maximum ZT value of 0.78, which is 7.09 times greater than that of the pure BiCuSeO sample (0.11) .
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".