BiGd: enthalpy of formation

3 accepted literature formation-enthalpy value(s) (experimental 1, model 1, DFT 1); experimental median -96.7 kJ/mol-atom (n = 1); Materials Project -87.324 kJ/mol-atom (mp-aaabiyzx); OQMD -88.653 kJ/mol-atom (oqmd-1926131).

Systems: Bi–Gd

Literature values

Enthalpy of formation of BiGd reported in the literature (3)
ValuePhase as printedT (K)ClassMethodSystemSourceLocationQuote
-96.7 kJ/mol-atomGdBi298.15experimentalBi–Gd[1] Wang 2013
cites Borzone 1980 doi
Table 5, p. 3, row 7
report
-83 kJ/mol-atomGdBi0modelMiedema modelBi–Gd[1] Wang 2013
cites Colinet 1984 doi
Table 5, p. 3, row 9
report
-90.4625 kJ/mol-atomGdBi0DFTfirst-principlesBi–Gd[1] Wang 2013Table 5, p. 3, row 8
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.

Uncertainty budget of the literature values of BiGd
ValueUnitPrintedReadingMethod (class, basis)CompositionScatterConversionEffective
-96.7kJ/mol-atom5.000e-43.5 (unknown, calibrated)3.5
-83kJ/mol-atom5.000e-43.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-90.4625kJ/mol-atom5.000e-68.395 (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.

DFT formation energy of BiGd
SourceEntrykJ/mol-atomeV/atomSpace groupE above hull (kJ/mol-atom)E above hull (eV/atom)Theoretical
Materials Projectmp-aaabiyzx-87.324-0.905058Fm-3m00no
OQMDoqmd-1926131-88.653-0.918823P-3m100yes

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

  1. Jinsan Wang, Changrong Li, Cuiping Guo, Zhenmin Du, Bo Wu, Thermodynamic assessment of the Gd–Bi and the Ho–Bi systems, Calphad 41, 1-5 (2013). doi:10.1016/j.calphad.2013.01.003