Ge5Yb3: enthalpy of formation

10 accepted literature formation-enthalpy value(s) (experimental 2, model 5, DFT 3); experimental median -49.8 kJ/mol-atom (n = 2); OQMD -58.344 kJ/mol-atom (oqmd-1823083).

Systems: Ge–Yb

Literature values

Enthalpy of formation of Ge5Yb3 reported in the literature (10)
ValuePhase as printedT (K)ClassMethodSystemSourceLocationQuote
-49.8 kJ/mol-atom ± 13.2Yb3Ge5298.15experimentalKEWL and KEMSGe–Yb[1] Achgar 2018
cites Balducci 2007 doi
Table 2, p. 5, row 14
report
-49.8 kJ/mol-atom ± 13.2Yb3Ge5298.15experimentalKE techniqueGe–Yb[2] Dai-man 2018
cites Balducci 2007
Table 2, p. 4, row 14
report
-63 kJ/mol-atomYb3Ge5modelPredictionGe–Yb[1] Achgar 2018
cites De 1988
Table 2, p. 5, row 15
report
-63 kJ/mol-atomYb3Ge5298.15modelMiedema modelGe–Yb[2] Dai-man 2018
cites Grytsiv 2002
Table 2, p. 4, row 16
report
-60.952 kJ/mol-atomYb3Ge5modelOptimizationGe–Yb[1] Achgar 2018Table 2, p. 5, row 17
report
-59.3 kJ/mol-atomYb3Ge5298.15modelSCMGe–Yb[2] Dai-man 2018Table 2, p. 4, row 18
report
-56.426 kJ/mol-atomYb3Ge5modelOptimizationGe–Yb[1] Achgar 2018Table 2, p. 5, row 18
report
-56.1 kJ/mol-atomYb3Ge50DFTDFT calculationGe–Yb[2] Dai-man 2018
cites Saal 2013
Table 2, p. 4, row 17
report
-55.9 kJ/mol-atom ± 6.2Yb3Ge5DFTDFTGe–Yb[1] Achgar 2018
cites Balducci 2007 doi
Table 2, p. 5, row 16
report
-55.9 kJ/mol-atom ± 6.2Yb3Ge5298.15DFTDFT calculationGe–Yb[2] Dai-man 2018
cites Balducci 2007
Table 2, p. 4, row 15
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 Ge5Yb3
ValueUnitPrintedReadingMethod (class, basis)CompositionScatterConversionEffective
-49.8kJ/mol-atom13.20.054.2 (kems_vapour, calibrated)13.2
-49.8kJ/mol-atom13.20.054.2 (kems_vapour, calibrated)13.2
-63kJ/mol-atom0.53.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-63kJ/mol-atom0.053.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-60.952kJ/mol-atom5.000e-43.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-59.3kJ/mol-atom0.053.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-56.426kJ/mol-atom5.000e-43.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-56.1kJ/mol-atom0.058.395 (dft, calibrated)8.395
-55.9kJ/mol-atom6.20.058.395 (dft, calibrated)8.395
-55.9kJ/mol-atom6.20.058.395 (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 Ge5Yb3
SourceEntrykJ/mol-atomeV/atomSpace groupE above hull (kJ/mol-atom)E above hull (eV/atom)Theoretical
OQMDoqmd-1823083-58.344-0.604696Cmcm0.35390.0037yes

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. Khadija Achgar, Saïd Kardellass, Najim Selhaoui, Thermodynamic assessment of the Ytterbium–Germanium binary system, J Therm Anal Calorim 131, 443-453 (2018). doi:10.1007/s10973-017-6203-x
  2. Zhu Dai-man, Li Chang-rong, Guo Cui-ping, Du Zhen-min, Thermodynamic assessment of the Ge-Yb binary system, Ferroelectrics 522, 80-87 (2018). doi:10.1080/00150193.2018.1392217