Bi3Er5: enthalpy of formation
16 accepted literature formation-enthalpy value(s) (experimental 4, model 7, DFT 5); experimental median -79 kJ/mol-atom (n = 4); Materials Project -62.124 kJ/mol-atom (mp-aaaabuog); OQMD -64.128 kJ/mol-atom (oqmd-18567).
Systems: Bi–Er
Literature values
| Value | Phase as printed | T (K) | Class | Method | System | Source | Location | Quote |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -81 kJ/mol-atom | Er5Bi3 | 298.15 | experimental | Bi–Er | [1] Wang 2017 cites Petrashkevich 1976 | Table 9, p. 7, row 7 report | ||
| -81 kJ/mol-atom | Bi3Er5 | 298.15 | experimental | Bi–Er | [2] Wang 2013 cites Petrashkevich 1976 | Table 4, p. 4, row 1 report | ||
| -77 kJ/mol-atom | Bi3Er5 | 298.15 | experimental | Bi–Er | [2] Wang 2013 cites Yamshchikov 1979 | Table 4, p. 4, row 2 report | ||
| -77 kJ/mol-atom | Er5Bi3 | 298.15 | experimental | Bi–Er | [1] Wang 2017 cites Yamshchikov 1979 | Table 9, p. 7, row 8 report | ||
| -70.28 kJ/mol-atom | Er5Bi3 | model | CALPHAD | Bi–Er | [3] Bennoui 2022 cites Wang 2013 doi | Table 2, p. 5, row 21 report | ||
| -69 kJ/mol-atom | Er5Bi3 | model | Miedema model | Bi–Er | [3] Bennoui 2022 cites Colinet 1984 doi | Table 2, p. 5, row 23 report | ||
| -69 kJ/mol-atom | Er5Bi3 | model | Bi–Er | [1] Wang 2017 cites Colinet 1984 doi | Table 9, p. 7, row 6 report | |||
| -69 kJ/mol-atom | Bi3Er5 | 0 | model | Miedima model | Bi–Er | [2] Wang 2013 cites Colinet 1984 doi | Table 4, p. 4, row 4 report | |
| -66.486 kJ/mol-atom | Er5Bi3 | model | CALPHAD | Bi–Er | [3] Bennoui 2022 cites Wang 2017 doi | Table 2, p. 5, row 22 report | ||
| -66.486 kJ/mol-atom | Er5Bi3 | model | Bi–Er | [1] Wang 2017 | Table 9, p. 7, row 9 report | |||
| -62.917 kJ/mol-atom | Er5Bi3 | model | CALPHAD | Bi–Er | [3] Bennoui 2022 | Table 2, p. 5, row 17 report | ||
| -66.035 kJ/mol-atom | Bi3Er5 | 0 | DFT | first-principles | Bi–Er | [2] Wang 2013 | Table 4, p. 4, row 3 report | |
| -66.035 kJ/mol-atom | Er5Bi3 | 0 | DFT | DFT | Bi–Er | [3] Bennoui 2022 cites Wang 2013 doi | Table 2, p. 5, row 20 report | |
| -64.084 kJ/mol-atom | Er5Bi3 | 0 | DFT | DFT | Bi–Er | [3] Bennoui 2022 cites Kirklin 2015 doi | Table 2, p. 5, row 18 report | |
| -63.496 kJ/mol-atom | Er5Bi3 | 0 | DFT | DFT | Bi–Er | [3] Bennoui 2022 | Table 2, p. 5, row 16 report | |
| -62.157 kJ/mol-atom | Er5Bi3 | 0 | DFT | DFT | Bi–Er | [3] Bennoui 2022 cites Jain 2013 doi | Table 2, p. 5, row 19 report |
Uncertainty budget
Components kept separate, in the value's unit (literature SCHEMA.md, UNCERTAINTY_CALIBRATION.md): effective = max(sqrt(max(printed, reading, method)^2 + composition^2 + conversion^2), scatter). The method floor is the robust between-study scatter of the method class in ORCHID (calibrated) or a documented prior; printed values and printed uncertainties are unchanged.
| Value | Unit | Printed | Reading | Method (class, basis) | Composition | Scatter | Conversion | Effective |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -81 | kJ/mol-atom | 0.5 | 3.5 (unknown, calibrated) | 3.5 | ||||
| -81 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 3.5 (unknown, calibrated) | 3.5 | ||||
| -77 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 3.5 (unknown, calibrated) | 3.5 | ||||
| -77 | kJ/mol-atom | 0.5 | 3.5 (unknown, calibrated) | 3.5 | ||||
| -70.28 | kJ/mol-atom | 0.005 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -69 | kJ/mol-atom | 0.05 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -69 | kJ/mol-atom | 0.5 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -69 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -66.486 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -66.486 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -62.917 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -66.035 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 8.395 (dft, calibrated) | 8.395 | ||||
| -66.035 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 8.395 (dft, calibrated) | 8.395 | ||||
| -64.084 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 8.395 (dft, calibrated) | 8.395 | ||||
| -63.496 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 8.395 (dft, calibrated) | 8.395 | ||||
| -62.157 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 8.395 (dft, calibrated) | 8.395 |
DFT formation energies
Lowest-energy entries at this composition. Materials Project and OQMD use different energy references and are never averaged. 1 eV/atom = 96.485 kJ/mol-atom.
| Source | Entry | kJ/mol-atom | eV/atom | Space group | E above hull (kJ/mol-atom) | E above hull (eV/atom) | Theoretical |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Materials Project | mp-aaaabuog | -62.124 | -0.643872 | Pnma | 0 | 0 | no |
| OQMD | oqmd-18567 | -64.128 | -0.664644 | Pnma | 0 | 0 | no |
DFT sources: A. Jain et al., Commentary: The Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation, APL Materials 1 (2013) 011002. doi:10.1063/1.4812323 (CC BY 4.0); J. E. Saal et al., JOM 65 (2013) 1501-1509; S. Kirklin et al., npj Comput. Mater. 1 (2015) 15010. doi:10.1007/s11837-013-0755-4 (CC BY 4.0);
Sources
- Yafei Wang, Wentao Zhou, Shaoqiang Guo, Jinsuo Zhang, Thermodynamic properties of fission products (Pr, Ce, Er) in liquid bismuth by thermodynamic assessment, Journal of Nuclear Materials 495, 181-191 (2017). doi:10.1016/j.jnucmat.2017.08.016
- Jinsan Wang, Changrong Li, Cuiping Guo, Zhenmin Du, Bo Wu, Thermodynamic assessment of the Bi–Er and the Bi–Dy systems, Thermochimica Acta 566, 44-49 (2013). doi:10.1016/j.tca.2013.05.024
- S. Bennoui, Y. Djaballah, V. Vassiliev, A. Belgacem-Bouzida, Thermodynamic Study of Er-Bi and Er-Te Systems by Combination of First-Principles Calculations and the CALPHAD Method, J. Phase Equilib. Diffus. 43, 126-138 (2022). doi:10.1007/s11669-022-00947-8