Cr5Ga6: enthalpy of formation

7 accepted literature formation-enthalpy value(s) (experimental 2, model 5); experimental median -4.7 kJ/mol-atom (n = 1).

Systems: Cr–Ga

Literature values

Enthalpy of formation of Cr5Ga6 reported in the literature (7)
Value	Phase as printed	T (K)	Class	Method	System	Source	Location
-4.7 kJ/mol-atom	Cr5Ga6	850	experimental		Cr–Ga	[1] Gröbner 1999 cites Gonchuruk 1981	Table 1, p. 2, row 47 report
-4.7 kJ/mol (basis unstated)	Cr5Ga6	298.15	experimental	EMF	Cr–Ga	[2] Belgacem-Bouzida 2005 cites Goncharuk 1981	Table 4, p. 4, row 10 report
-15.15 kJ/mol-atom	Cr5Ga6	298.15	model		Cr–Ga	[1] Gröbner 1999	Table 1, p. 2, row 48 report
-15.15 kJ/mol (basis unstated)	Cr5Ga6		model	Assessed	Cr–Ga	[2] Belgacem-Bouzida 2005 cites Grobner 1999 doi	Table 4, p. 4, row 11 report
-15 kJ/mol (basis unstated)	Cr5Ga6		model	Semi-empirical model	Cr–Ga	[2] Belgacem-Bouzida 2005 cites Djaballah 1999	Table 4, p. 4, row 12 report
-15 kJ/mol-atom	Cr5Ga6	298.15	model		Cr–Ga	[1] Gröbner 1999 cites F 1988	Table 1, p. 2, row 49 report
-12.31 kJ/mol (basis unstated)	Cr5Ga6		model	Assessed	Cr–Ga	[2] Belgacem-Bouzida 2005	Table 4, p. 4, row 13 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 Cr5Ga6
Value	Unit	Reading	Method (class, basis)	Effective
-4.7	kJ/mol-atom	0.05	3.5 (unknown, calibrated)	3.5
-4.7	kJ/mol (basis unstated)	0.05	41.4 (emf, cleaned_below_threshold)	41.4
-15.15	kJ/mol-atom	0.005	3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)	3.9
-15.15	kJ/mol (basis unstated)	0.005	35.1 (model_calculated, calibrated)	35.1
-15	kJ/mol (basis unstated)	0.5	35.1 (model_calculated, calibrated)	35.1
-15	kJ/mol-atom	0.5	3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)	3.9
-12.31	kJ/mol (basis unstated)	0.005	35.1 (model_calculated, calibrated)	35.1

Sources

J. Gröbner, R. Wenzel, G. G. Fischer, R. Schmid-Fetzer, Thermodynamic calculation of the binary systems M-Ga and investigation of ternary M-Ga-N phase equilibria (M=Ni, Co, Pd, Cr), JPE 20, 615-625 (1999). doi:10.1361/105497199770340608
A. Belgacem-Bouzida, Y. Djaballah, M. Notin, Calorimetric measurement of the intermetallic compounds Cr3Ga and CrGa4 and thermodynamic assessment of the (Cr–Ga) system, Journal of Alloys and Compounds 397, 155-160 (2005). doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2005.01.026

Please cite

R. Arróyave, J. Saal, D. Shin, ORCHID-Values: thermodynamic and phase-equilibrium values read from the literature (version 2026.10; Version 1, machine-extracted), Zenodo (2026). doi:10.5281/zenodo.23735569
R. Arróyave, J. Saal, D. Shin, ORCHID-Parity: DFT-vs-experiment formation-enthalpy benchmark (version 2026.10; Version 1, machine-extracted), Zenodo (2026). doi:10.5281/zenodo.23735943
R. Arróyave, J. Saal, D. Shin, ORCHID data: umbrella record of the ORCHID datasets (version 2026.10; Version 1, machine-extracted), Zenodo (2026). doi:10.5281/zenodo.23736065

Also cite the original source of every value you use (paper_citation / paper_doi, and cited_dois for values the paper cites from earlier work); A. Jain et al., The Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation, APL Materials 1 (2013) 011002, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4812323 (CC BY 4.0); J. E. Saal et al., JOM 65 (2013) 1501, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-013-0755-4 and S. Kirklin et al., npj Comput. Mater. 1 (2015) 15010, https://doi.org/10.1038/npjcompumats.2015.10 (CC BY 4.0); G. Kim, S. V. Meschel, P. Nash, W. Chen, Experimental formation enthalpies for intermetallic phases and other inorganic compounds, Scientific Data 4 (2017) 170162, https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2017.162; B. Hallstedt, The SGTE collection of binary datasets, Calphad 89 (2025) 102833, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.calphad.2025.102833 (CC BY 4.0), and the original assessment named in each file. Version 1, machine-extracted: values were read by language-model readers constrained to quote their source and checked automatically, and the release was then audited on the printed pages by adversarial audits, an independent second review of fit-facing records and a preliminary human review of a frozen sample. Flags such as accepted and ESPEI-ready record screening results, not certification; known issues are listed in the release notes.

@misc{orchid_literature_2026,
  author    = {Arr{\'o}yave, Raymundo and Saal, James and Shin, Dongwon},
  title     = {{ORCHID-Values: thermodynamic and phase-equilibrium values read from the literature}},
  version   = {2026.10},
  publisher = {Zenodo},
  year      = {2026},
  doi       = {10.5281/zenodo.23735569},
  url       = {https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23735569},
  note      = {Version 1, machine-extracted}
}

@misc{orchid_dft_benchmark_2026,
  author    = {Arr{\'o}yave, Raymundo and Saal, James and Shin, Dongwon},
  title     = {{ORCHID-Parity: DFT-vs-experiment formation-enthalpy benchmark}},
  version   = {2026.10},
  publisher = {Zenodo},
  year      = {2026},
  doi       = {10.5281/zenodo.23735943},
  url       = {https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23735943},
  note      = {Version 1, machine-extracted}
}

@misc{orchid_data_2026,
  author    = {Arr{\'o}yave, Raymundo and Saal, James and Shin, Dongwon},
  title     = {{ORCHID data: umbrella record of the ORCHID datasets}},
  version   = {2026.10},
  publisher = {Zenodo},
  year      = {2026},
  doi       = {10.5281/zenodo.23736065},
  url       = {https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23736065},
  note      = {Version 1, machine-extracted}
}