LiNbO<sub>3</sub>-type polar antiferromagnet InVO<sub>3</sub> synthesized under high-pressure conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABO3-type oxides exhibit various structures with different combinations of A-and B-site ions.Their structures can be empirically predicted by Goldschmidt's tolerance factor t, t = (rA+rO)/√2(rB+rO), where rA, rB, and rO are the radii of the A, B, and oxygen ions, respectively [1].As shown in Figure 1, the Ln 3+ V 3+ O3 (Ln: lanthanides) crystallizes in the GdFeO3-type distorted perovskite structure with a tolerance factor, t, from 0.786 to 0.843 [2][3][4].While ScVO3 (t = 0.744) crystallizes in a bixbyite-type structure, which is described as (Sc0.5V0.5)2O3 with disordered Sc 3+ and V 3+ [5].Interestingly, the bixbyite-type ScVO3 undergoes cation ordering to the GdFeO3-type perovskite phase by applying highpressure and high-temperature conditions [6].InVO3 was also reported to crystallize in a bixbyite-type structure upon reduction of InVO4 [7].Although the ionic radius of In 3+ (0.80 Å) is between that of Lu 3+ and Sc 3+ , the GdFeO3-type perovskite phase has not been reported yet.In this study, we applied high-pressure and high-temperature technique to synthesize the perovskite phase for InVO3.Instead, we have found that the polar LiNbO3-type structure is stabilized under 9 GPa and 1373 K. Figure 2 shows the synchrotron Xray diffraction (SXRD) pattern of newly obtained InVO3.LiNbO3-type structure with space group R3c can considerably fit the SXRD pattern, giving the lattice parameters a = 5.29139(3) Å and c = 13.98160(7)Å [6].The crystal structure, polar and magnetic properties will be discussed in the conference.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".