MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402644011 · doi:10.1149/1945-7111/ad7b7c

Analysis of Corrosion Potential of Zn, Ni, and Zn-Ni Alloy Using Ab Initio Calculations Supported by Experimental Thermodynamics Data

2024· article· en· W4402644011 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mohammad Asif, Shams Anwar, Kelly Hawboldt, Faisal Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicnanoparticles nucleation surface interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanada Research ChairsMary Kay O'Connor Process Safety CenterGenome Canada
KeywordsAlloyThermodynamicsAb initioCorrosionMaterials scienceAb initio quantum chemistry methodsMetallurgyChemistryPhysical chemistryComputational chemistryPhysicsOrganic chemistryMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The purpose of this study is to investigate the corrosion properties of Zn, Ni, and Zn-Ni alloy using density functional theory (DFT). DFT can assist in predicting the thermodynamic properties of challenging compounds such as metals, alloys, and transition metal oxides. In the present work, DFT is used to predict Zn, Ni, and Zn-Ni alloy phase diagram. The Hubbard correction (U) and dispersion correction (D) are used to minimize the inherent error associated with the DFT. We studied the crystal structure, electronic structures, and thermodynamic energies of Zn and Ni compounds using the generalized gradient approximation (GGA) density functional employing Perdew Burke Ernzerhof (PBE). We have developed the corresponding Pourbaix diagram of Zn, Ni, and their alloy to compare the performance of density functional theory with the experimental observations. The corrosion behavior of various alloys including ZN11, NI2, ZnNi, ZNNi3 are compared and discussed. This can be useful for predicting the corrosion-resistant properties of these alloys.

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 score0.769
Threshold uncertainty score0.385

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Electrochemical SocietySame topicnanoparticles nucleation surface interactionsFrench-language works237,207