Mg2Pb: enthalpy of formation

20 accepted literature formation-enthalpy value(s) (experimental 10, DFT 10); experimental median -5.847 kJ/mol-atom (n = 10); Materials Project -5.451 kJ/mol-atom (mp-aaaaberc); OQMD -6.083 kJ/mol-atom (oqmd-17637).

Systems: Mg–Pb

Literature values

Enthalpy of formation of Mg2Pb reported in the literature (20)
Value	Phase as printed	T (K)	Class	Method	System	Source	Location
-5.9 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb		experimental	experimental, method not specified in reporting paper	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites at 943 K	Table 3, p. 4, row 11 report
-5.89525 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb		experimental	experimental, method not specified in reporting paper	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites at 943 K	Table 3, p. 4, row 11 report
-5.855 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb		experimental	experimental, method not specified in reporting paper	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites Dobovisek 1965	Table 3, p. 4, row 9 report
-5.855 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb		experimental	experimental, method not specified in reporting paper	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites Seith 1937	Table 3, p. 4, row 7 report
-5.84701 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb		experimental	experimental, method not specified in reporting paper	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites Dobovisek 1965	Table 3, p. 4, row 9 report
-5.84701 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb		experimental	experimental, method not specified in reporting paper	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites Seith 1937	Table 3, p. 4, row 7 report
-5.533 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb		experimental	experimental, method not specified in reporting paper	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites Dobovisek 1965	Table 3, p. 4, row 10 report
-5.52861 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb		experimental	experimental, method not specified in reporting paper	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites Dobovisek 1965	Table 3, p. 4, row 10 report
-5.5 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb		experimental	experimental, method not specified in reporting paper	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites Grethe 1959	Table 3, p. 4, row 8 report
-5.49966 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb		experimental	experimental, method not specified in reporting paper	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites Grethe 1959	Table 3, p. 4, row 8 report
-11.6747 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb	0	DFT	VASP/GGA PBE PAW	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites JARVIS	Table 3, p. 4, row 13 report
-11.674 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb	0	DFT	VASP/GGA PBE PAW	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites JARVIS	Table 3, p. 4, row 13 report
-6.13647 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb	0	DFT	VASP/GGA PBE PAW	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites Automatic	Table 3, p. 4, row 15 report
-6.136 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb	0	DFT	VASP/GGA PBE PAW	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites Automatic	Table 3, p. 4, row 15 report
-6.07858 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb	0	DFT	VASP/GGA PBE PAW	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites The	Table 3, p. 4, row 14 report
-6.078 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb	0	DFT	VASP/GGA PBE PAW	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites The	Table 3, p. 4, row 14 report
-5.978 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb	0	DFT	QE/GGA PBESol	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021	Table 3, p. 4, row 6 report
-5.97244 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb	0	DFT	QE/GGA PBESol	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021	Table 3, p. 4, row 6 report
-4.24535 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb	0	DFT	VASP/GGA PBE PAW	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites Materials	Table 3, p. 4, row 12 report
-4.245 kJ/mol-atom	Mg2Pb	0	DFT	VASP/GGA PBE PAW	Mg–Pb	[1] Dębski 2021 cites Materials	Table 3, p. 4, row 12 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 Mg2Pb
Value	Unit	Reading	Method (class, basis)	Effective
-5.9	kJ/mol-atom	5.000e-5	4.1 (experimental_unspecified, cleaned_below_threshold)	4.1
-5.89525	kJ/mol-atom	0.004824	4.1 (experimental_unspecified, cleaned_below_threshold)	4.1
-5.855	kJ/mol-atom	5.000e-5	4.1 (experimental_unspecified, cleaned_below_threshold)	4.1
-5.855	kJ/mol-atom	5.000e-5	4.1 (experimental_unspecified, cleaned_below_threshold)	4.1
-5.84701	kJ/mol-atom	0.004824	4.1 (experimental_unspecified, cleaned_below_threshold)	4.1
-5.84701	kJ/mol-atom	0.004824	4.1 (experimental_unspecified, cleaned_below_threshold)	4.1
-5.533	kJ/mol-atom	5.000e-5	4.1 (experimental_unspecified, cleaned_below_threshold)	4.1
-5.52861	kJ/mol-atom	0.004824	4.1 (experimental_unspecified, cleaned_below_threshold)	4.1
-5.5	kJ/mol-atom	5.000e-5	4.1 (experimental_unspecified, cleaned_below_threshold)	4.1
-5.49966	kJ/mol-atom	0.04824	4.1 (experimental_unspecified, cleaned_below_threshold)	4.1
-11.6747	kJ/mol-atom	0.04824	8.395 (dft, calibrated)	8.395
-11.674	kJ/mol-atom	5.000e-5	8.395 (dft, calibrated)	8.395
-6.13647	kJ/mol-atom	0.004824	8.395 (dft, calibrated)	8.395
-6.136	kJ/mol-atom	5.000e-5	8.395 (dft, calibrated)	8.395
-6.07858	kJ/mol-atom	0.04824	8.395 (dft, calibrated)	8.395
-6.078	kJ/mol-atom	5.000e-5	8.395 (dft, calibrated)	8.395
-5.978	kJ/mol-atom	5.000e-5	8.395 (dft, calibrated)	8.395
-5.97244	kJ/mol-atom	0.004824	8.395 (dft, calibrated)	8.395
-4.24535	kJ/mol-atom	0.04824	8.395 (dft, calibrated)	8.395
-4.245	kJ/mol-atom	5.000e-5	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.

DFT formation energy of Mg2Pb
Source	Entry	kJ/mol-atom	eV/atom	Space group	E above hull (kJ/mol-atom)	E above hull (eV/atom)	Theoretical
Materials Project	mp-aaaaberc	-5.451	-0.056501	Fm-3m	0	0	no
OQMD	oqmd-17637	-6.083	-0.063042	Fm-3m	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

A. Dębski, W. Gierlotka, S. Terlicka, W. Gąsior, On the Mg-Pb system. Calorimetric studies and thermodynamic calculations, Journal of Alloys and Compounds 861, 158396 (2021). doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2020.158396

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}
}