Effect of calcium–magnesium–aluminum silicate composition on reaction behavior for X1‐Gd <sub>2</sub> SiO <sub>5</sub> and X2‐Er <sub>2</sub> SiO <sub>5</sub> environmental barrier coatings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rare‐earth (RE) silicates environmental barrier coatings (EBCs) are prone to accelerate failure resulted from molten calcium–magnesium–aluminum silicate (CMAS), which presents significant challenges to the design and development of durable EBCs. In this study, X1‐Gd 2 SiO 5 and X2‐Er 2 SiO 5 coatings were explored on their corrosion resistance to CMAS melts with different Ca/Si ratios (1.1, 0.75, 0.64, and 0.42) at 1350°C for 25 and 50 h, respectively. Results showed that with the Ca/Si ratio increasing, CMAS viscosity decreased and a more intense corrosion reaction with coatings occurred. Garnet phase was only observed in X2‐Er 2 SiO 5 coating corroded by CMAS with high Ca/Si ratios, which could be beneficial for improving corrosion resistance. The X2‐Er 2 SiO 5 phase, which is composed of [SO 4 ] and [REO 6 ]/[REO 7 ] polyhedrons, exhibits better corrosion resistance due to its more stable crystal structure, lower reactivity with CMAS, and the radius difference between the RE ions and Ca 2+ .
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".