InN: enthalpy of formation

17 accepted literature formation-enthalpy value(s) (experimental 8, model 3, unspecified 6).

Systems: In–N

Literature values

Enthalpy of formation of InN reported in the literature (17)
Value	Phase as printed	T (K)	Class	Method	System	Source	Location
-143.5 per formula unit	InN	298.15	experimental	Decomposition of InN (+In) powders, high pressure autoclave-derived from P(T) curve slope	In–N	[1] Onderka 2002 cites MacChesney 1970	Table III, p. 10, row 2 report
-136.4 per formula unit ± 19	InN	298.15	experimental	Mass-spectrometer, Knudsen cell, derived from P(T) curve slope	In–N	[1] Onderka 2002 cites Vorobev 1973	Table III, p. 10, row 5 report
-132.6 per formula unit ± 6	InN	298.15	experimental	Mass-spectrometer, Knudsen cell, derived from P(T) curve slope	In–N	[1] Onderka 2002 cites Vorobev 1971	Table III, p. 10, row 4 report
-131.4 per formula unit ± 7	InN	298.15	experimental	Mass-spectrometer static, derived from P(T) curve slope	In–N	[1] Onderka 2002 cites Jones 1987	Table III, p. 10, row 7 report
-127.6 per formula unit ± 3	InN	298.15	experimental	Mass-spectrometer, Knudsen cell, derived from P(T) curve slope	In–N	[1] Onderka 2002 cites Gordienko 1977	Table III, p. 10, row 6 report
-113 per formula unit ± 42	InN	298.15	experimental	Mass-spectrometer, static, derived from P(T) curve slope	In–N	[1] Onderka 2002 cites Vorobev 1971	Table III, p. 10, row 3 report
-28.6 per formula unit ± 9.2	InN	298.15	experimental	Oxidative drop solution calorimetry at 975 K	In–N	[1] Onderka 2002 cites Ranade 2001	Table III, p. 10, row 8 report
-19.2 per formula unit ± 2	InN	298.15	experimental	Combustion of InN in a bomb-calorimeter (b)	In–N	[1] Onderka 2002 cites Hahn 1940	Table III, p. 10, row 10 report
-96.5 per formula unit	InN	298.15	model	Calculated from S°298(InN) and T^LSG = 773 K at 1 bar, first choice	In–N	[1] Onderka 2002	Table III, p. 10, row 11 report
-96.5 kJ/mol (basis unstated)	InN	298.15	model		In–N	[1] Onderka 2002	Table AI, p. 18, row 34 report
-28.6 kJ/mol (basis unstated)	InN	298.15	model		In–N	[1] Onderka 2002	Table AI, p. 18, row 34 report
-133.1 kJ/mol (basis unstated)	InN	298.15	unspecified		In–N	[1] Onderka 2002 cites Vorobev 1973	Table AI, p. 18, row 42 report
-129.3 kJ/mol (basis unstated)	InN	298.15	unspecified		In–N	[1] Onderka 2002 cites Vorobev 1971	Table AI, p. 18, row 41 report
-128.1 kJ/mol (basis unstated)	InN	298.15	unspecified		In–N	[1] Onderka 2002 cites Jones 1987	Table AI, p. 18, row 44 report
-124.3 kJ/mol (basis unstated)	InN	298.15	unspecified		In–N	[1] Onderka 2002 cites Gordienko 1977	Table AI, p. 18, row 43 report
-109.7 kJ/mol (basis unstated)	InN	298.15	unspecified		In–N	[1] Onderka 2002 cites Vorobev 1971	Table AI, p. 18, row 41 report
-19.2 kJ/mol (basis unstated)	InN	298.15	unspecified		In–N	[1] Onderka 2002 cites Hahn 1940	Table AI, p. 18, row 40 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 InN
Value	Unit	Printed	Reading	Method (class, basis)	Effective
-143.5	per formula unit		0.05	unit 'per formula unit' not convertible to kJ/mol-atom	unit 'per formula unit' not convertible to kJ/mol-atom
-136.4	per formula unit	19	0.05	unit 'per formula unit' not convertible to kJ/mol-atom	19
-132.6	per formula unit	6	0.05	unit 'per formula unit' not convertible to kJ/mol-atom	6
-131.4	per formula unit	7	0.05	unit 'per formula unit' not convertible to kJ/mol-atom	7
-127.6	per formula unit	3	0.05	unit 'per formula unit' not convertible to kJ/mol-atom	3
-113	per formula unit	42	0.05	unit 'per formula unit' not convertible to kJ/mol-atom	42
-28.6	per formula unit	9.2	0.05	unit 'per formula unit' not convertible to kJ/mol-atom	9.2
-19.2	per formula unit	2	0.05	unit 'per formula unit' not convertible to kJ/mol-atom	2
-96.5	per formula unit		0.05	unit 'per formula unit' not convertible to kJ/mol-atom	unit 'per formula unit' not convertible to kJ/mol-atom
-96.5	kJ/mol (basis unstated)		0.05	7.8 (model_calculated, calibrated)	7.8
-28.6	kJ/mol (basis unstated)		0.05	7.8 (model_calculated, calibrated)	7.8
-133.1	kJ/mol (basis unstated)		0.05	7 (unknown, calibrated)	7
-129.3	kJ/mol (basis unstated)		0.05	7 (unknown, calibrated)	7
-128.1	kJ/mol (basis unstated)		0.05	7 (unknown, calibrated)	7
-124.3	kJ/mol (basis unstated)		0.05	7 (unknown, calibrated)	7
-109.7	kJ/mol (basis unstated)		0.05	7 (unknown, calibrated)	7
-19.2	kJ/mol (basis unstated)		0.05	7 (unknown, calibrated)	7

Sources

B. Onderka, J. Unland, R. Schmid-Fetzer, Thermodynamics and phase stability in the In–N system, J. Mater. Res. 17, 3065-3083 (2002). doi:10.1557/jmr.2002.0445

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}
}