Ce16Ru9: enthalpy of formation
10 accepted literature formation-enthalpy value(s) (model 7, DFT 3); Materials Project -31.702 kJ/mol-atom (mp-aaabglth); OQMD -7.886 kJ/mol-atom (oqmd-94704).
Systems: Ce–Ru
Literature values
| Value | Phase as printed | T (K) | Class | Method | System | Source | Location | Quote |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -33.8647 kJ/mol-atom | Ce16Ru9 | model | Miedema’s model | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 cites De 2014 | Table 3, p. 9, row 37 report | ||
| -31.341 kJ/mol-atom | Ce16Ru9 | model | Calculation II | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 cites Selhaoui 1998 doi | Table 3, p. 9, row 36 report | ||
| -27.8668 kJ/mol-atom | Ce16Ru9 | model | Optimization LM | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 | Table 3, p. 9, row 32 report | ||
| -26.861 kJ/mol-atom | Ce16Ru9 | model | Modified Miedema’s model | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 cites Zhang 2007 doi | Table 3, p. 9, row 41 report | ||
| -25.897 kJ/mol-atom | Ce16Ru9 | model | Calculation I | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 cites Selhaoui 1998 doi | Table 3, p. 9, row 35 report | ||
| -25.7403 kJ/mol-atom | Ce16Ru9 | model | Optimization CM | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 | Table 3, p. 9, row 34 report | ||
| -21.4321 kJ/mol-atom | Ce16Ru9 | model | Optimization EM | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 | Table 3, p. 9, row 33 report | ||
| -31.908 kJ/mol-atom | Ce16Ru9 | DFT | Ab-initio | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 cites Ceder 2010 | Table 3, p. 9, row 39 report | ||
| -29.329 kJ/mol-atom | Ce16Ru9 | 0 | DFT | Ab-initio | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 | Table 3, p. 9, row 38 report | |
| -7.9048 kJ/mol-atom | Ce16Ru9 | 0 | DFT | Ab-initio | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 cites Kirklin 2015 doi | Table 3, p. 9, row 40 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -33.8647 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-6 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -31.341 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -27.8668 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-6 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -26.861 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-6 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -25.897 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -25.7403 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-5 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -21.4321 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-6 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -31.908 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 8.395 (dft, calibrated) | 8.395 | ||||
| -29.329 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 8.395 (dft, calibrated) | 8.395 | ||||
| -7.9048 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-5 | 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-aaabglth | -31.702 | -0.32857 | R-3m | 0 | 0 | no |
| OQMD | oqmd-94704 | -7.886 | -0.081734 | R-3m | 3.5102 | 0.0364 | 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
- S. Kardellass, C. Corvalan-Moya, V. P. Vassiliev, Thermodynamic Modeling of the (Ce and Sm)-Ru Binary Systems Based on Linear, Exponential, and Combined Models Aided by Ab-Initio Calculations, J. Phase Equilib. Diffus. 44, 300-323 (2023). doi:10.1007/s11669-023-01043-1