GeYb2: enthalpy of formation
6 accepted literature formation-enthalpy value(s) (experimental 2, model 3, DFT 1); experimental median -66.2 kJ/mol-atom (n = 2); OQMD -65.114 kJ/mol-atom (oqmd-16528).
Systems: Ge–Yb
Literature values
| Value | Phase as printed | T (K) | Class | Method | System | Source | Location | Quote |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -66.2 kJ/mol-atom ± 8.3 | Yb2Ge | 298.15 | experimental | KE technique | Ge–Yb | [1] Dai-man 2018 cites Balducci 2007 | Table 2, p. 4, row 1 report | |
| -66.2 kJ/mol-atom ± 8.3 | Yb2Ge | 298.15 | experimental | KEWL and KEMS | Ge–Yb | [2] Achgar 2018 cites Balducci 2007 doi | Table 2, p. 5, row 1 report | |
| -66.7 kJ/mol-atom | Yb2Ge | 298.15 | model | SCM | Ge–Yb | [1] Dai-man 2018 | Table 2, p. 4, row 3 report | |
| -66.303 kJ/mol-atom | Yb2Ge | model | Optimization | Ge–Yb | [2] Achgar 2018 | Table 2, p. 5, row 3 report | ||
| -63.856 kJ/mol-atom | Yb2Ge | model | Optimization | Ge–Yb | [2] Achgar 2018 | Table 2, p. 5, row 2 report | ||
| -65.1 kJ/mol-atom | Yb2Ge | 0 | DFT | DFT calculation | Ge–Yb | [1] Dai-man 2018 cites Saal 2013 | Table 2, p. 4, row 2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -66.2 | kJ/mol-atom | 8.3 | 0.05 | 4.2 (kems_vapour, calibrated) | 8.3 | |||
| -66.2 | kJ/mol-atom | 8.3 | 0.05 | 4.2 (kems_vapour, calibrated) | 8.3 | |||
| -66.7 | kJ/mol-atom | 0.05 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -66.303 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -63.856 | kJ/mol-atom | 5.000e-4 | 3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated) | 3.9 | ||||
| -65.1 | kJ/mol-atom | 0.05 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OQMD | oqmd-16528 | -65.114 | -0.674863 | Pnma | 0 | 0 | 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
- 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
- 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