MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396800033 · doi:10.1107/s2053273323085078

Evolution of valence electron density of compressed Na–Au alloys

2023· article· en· W4396800033 on OpenAlexaff
John S. Tse, Nnanna Ukoji, Jianbao Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Crystallographica Section A Foundations and Advances · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermodynamic and Structural Properties of Metals and Alloys
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceValence (chemistry)ElectronValence electronCondensed matter physicsPhysicsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maximum Entropy Method (MEM) analyses were performed on previously reported synchrotron x-ray powder diffraction patterns of Na-Au intermetallics from 0.8 to 60 GPa [1].The derived valence charge density distributions show gradual electron migration from electropositive Na to electronegative Au as the pressure is increased.However, the electronic interaction cannot be ascribed to a simple electron transfer process proposed for the analogous K-Ag alloy system [2].Na-Au "covalent" bonds and and electrides were identified in the low-pressure orthorhombic phase-I Na2Au The electron distribution of the higher pressure phase II Na3Au, in which Rietveld refinements failed to distinguish between a trigonal and hexagonal structure, is consistent with the hexagonal space group.Clear evidence of Au-Au and Na-Au bonds was observed in the high-pressure cubic phase-III Na3Au.Charge densities computed from density functional theory complement and support the MEM analysis.Projection of the plane wave wavefunctions into atom-centred orbitals followed by the construction of natural bind orbital and the solid state extension provided a conventional description based on the two-center two-electron and multi-center bonding scheme.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Crystallographica Section A Foundations and AdvancesSame topicThermodynamic and Structural Properties of Metals and AlloysFrench-language works237,207