The Effect of Nb Doping on the Properties of Ti-Al Intermetallic Compounds Using First-Principles Calculations
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The crystal structures, stability, mechanical properties and electronic structures of Nb-free and Nb-doped Ti-Al intermetallic compounds were investigated via first-principles calculations. Seven components and eleven crystal configurations were considered based on the phase diagram. The calculated results demonstrate that hP8-Ti3Al, tP4-TiAl, tP32-Ti3Al5, tI24-TiAl2, tI16-Ti5Al11, tI24-Ti2Al5, and tI32-TiAl3 are the most stable phases. Mechanical properties were estimated with the calculated elastic constants, as well as the bulk modulus, shear modulus, Young’s modulus, Poisson’s ratio and Pugh’s ratio following the Voigt–Reuss–Hill scheme. As the Al content increases, the mechanical strength increases but the ductility decreases in the Ti-Al compounds. This results from the enhanced covalent bond formed by the continuously enhanced Al-sp hybrid orbitals and Ti-3d orbitals. Nb doping (~5 at.% in this study) keeps the thermodynamical and mechanical stability for the Ti-Al compounds, which exhibit slightly higher bulk modulus and better ductility. This is attributed to the fact that the Nb 4d orbitals locate near the Fermi level and interact with the Ti-3d and Al-3p orbitals, improving the metallic bonds based on the electronic structures.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it