Ge8Yb3: enthalpy of formation

6 accepted literature formation-enthalpy value(s) (model 5, DFT 1); OQMD -41.374 kJ/mol-atom (oqmd-16641).

Systems: Ge–Yb

Literature values

Enthalpy of formation of Ge8Yb3 reported in the literature (6)
ValuePhase as printedT (K)ClassMethodSystemSourceLocationQuote
-48.5 kJ/mol-atomYb3Ge8298.15modelMiedema modelGe–Yb[1] Dai-man 2018
cites Pani 2003
Table 2, p. 4, row 19
report
-48.5 kJ/mol-atomYb3Ge8modelPredictionGe–Yb[2] Achgar 2018
cites De 1988
Table 2, p. 5, row 19
report
-47.941 kJ/mol-atomYb3Ge8modelOptimizationGe–Yb[2] Achgar 2018Table 2, p. 5, row 20
report
-45.05 kJ/mol-atomYb3Ge8298.15modelSCMGe–Yb[1] Dai-man 2018Table 2, p. 4, row 21
report
-44.343 kJ/mol-atomYb3Ge8modelOptimizationGe–Yb[2] Achgar 2018Table 2, p. 5, row 21
report
-40.8 kJ/mol-atomYb3Ge80DFTDFT calculationGe–Yb[1] Dai-man 2018
cites Saal 2013
Table 2, p. 4, row 20
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 Ge8Yb3
ValueUnitPrintedReadingMethod (class, basis)CompositionScatterConversionEffective
-48.5kJ/mol-atom0.053.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-48.5kJ/mol-atom0.053.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-47.941kJ/mol-atom5.000e-43.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-45.05kJ/mol-atom0.0053.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-44.343kJ/mol-atom5.000e-43.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-40.8kJ/mol-atom0.058.395 (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 Ge8Yb3
SourceEntrykJ/mol-atomeV/atomSpace groupE above hull (kJ/mol-atom)E above hull (eV/atom)Theoretical
OQMDoqmd-16641-41.374-0.428812P-13.23660.0335no

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. 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
  2. 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