Ce4Ru3: enthalpy of formation
12 accepted literature formation-enthalpy value(s) (model 7, DFT 5); Materials Project -36.04 kJ/mol-atom (mp-aaabgmdh); OQMD -8.5 kJ/mol-atom (oqmd-94706).
Systems: Ce–Ru
Literature values
| Value | Phase as printed | T (K) | Class | Method | System | Source | Location | Quote |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -39.4856 kJ/mol-atom | Ce4Ru3 | model | Miedema’s model | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 cites De 2014 | Table 3, p. 9, row 47 report | ||
| -33.043 kJ/mol-atom | Ce4Ru3 | model | Calculation II | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 cites Selhaoui 1998 doi | Table 3, p. 9, row 46 report | ||
| -32.3866 kJ/mol-atom | Ce4Ru3 | model | Optimization LM | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 | Table 3, p. 9, row 42 report | ||
| -30.7889 kJ/mol-atom | Ce4Ru3 | model | Optimization CM | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 | Table 3, p. 9, row 44 report | ||
| -29.3653 kJ/mol-atom | Ce4Ru3 | model | Modified Miedema’s model | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 cites Zhang 2007 doi | Table 3, p. 9, row 53 report | ||
| -28.082 kJ/mol-atom | Ce4Ru3 | model | Calculation I | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 cites Selhaoui 1998 doi | Table 3, p. 9, row 45 report | ||
| -25.6237 kJ/mol-atom | Ce4Ru3 | model | Optimization EM | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 | Table 3, p. 9, row 43 report | ||
| -36.1464 kJ/mol-atom | Ce4Ru3 | 0 | DFT | Ab-initio (Magnetic) | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 | Table 3, p. 9, row 48 report | |
| -36.0861 kJ/mol-atom | Ce4Ru3 | 0 | DFT | Ab-initio (No-magnetic) | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 | Table 3, p. 9, row 49 report | |
| -36.053 kJ/mol-atom | Ce4Ru3 | DFT | Ab-initio | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 cites Ceder 2010 | Table 3, p. 9, row 50 report | ||
| -36.0237 kJ/mol-atom | Ce4Ru3 | 0 | DFT | Ab-initio | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 | Table 3, p. 9, row 52 report | |
| -8.4832 kJ/mol-atom | Ce4Ru3 | 0 | DFT | Ab-initio | Ce–Ru | [1] Kardellass 2023 cites Kirklin 2015 doi | Table 3, p. 9, row 51 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -39.4856 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-6 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -33.043 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -32.3866 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-6 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -30.7889 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-6 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -29.3653 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-6 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -28.082 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -25.6237 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-6 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -36.1464 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-6 | 8.395 (dft, calibrated) | 8.395 | ||||
| -36.0861 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-5 | 8.395 (dft, calibrated) | 8.395 | ||||
| -36.053 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 8.395 (dft, calibrated) | 8.395 | ||||
| -36.0237 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-6 | 8.395 (dft, calibrated) | 8.395 | ||||
| -8.4832 | 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-aaabgmdh | -36.04 | -0.37353 | C2/m | 0 | 0 | no |
| OQMD | oqmd-94706 | -8.5 | -0.088095 | C2/m | 1.6754 | 0.0174 | 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