MnO2: enthalpy of formation

24 accepted literature formation-enthalpy value(s) (experimental 10, model 14); experimental median -174.73 kJ/mol-atom (n = 10); Materials Project -174.236 kJ/mol-atom (mp-aaaabcrz); OQMD -168.93 kJ/mol-atom (oqmd-677684).

Systems: Mn–O

Literature values

Enthalpy of formation of MnO2 reported in the literature (24)
Value	Phase as printed	T (K)	Class	Method	System	Source	Location
-175.007 kJ/mol-atom	MnO2	298.15	experimental	combustion	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Ulich 1940 doi	Table 11, p. 16, row 82 report
-175.007 kJ/mol-atom	Pyrolusite (MnO2)	298.15	experimental	combusion	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Siemonsen 1939	Table 11, p. 16, row 36 report
-175.007 kJ/mol-atom	MnO2	298.15	experimental	combustion	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Siemonsen 1939	Table 11, p. 16, row 81 report
-175.007 kJ/mol-atom	Pyrolusite (MnO2)	298.15	experimental	combusion	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Ulich 1940 doi	Table 11, p. 16, row 37 report
-174.73 kJ/mol-atom	Pyrolusite (MnO2)	298.15	experimental	combusion	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Le 1896	Table 11, p. 16, row 34 report
-174.73 kJ/mol-atom	MnO2	298.15	experimental	combustion	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Le 1896	Table 11, p. 16, row 79 report
-173.947 kJ/mol-atom	MnO2	298.15	experimental	solution	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Shomate 1943 doi	Table 11, p. 16, row 83 report
-173.947 kJ/mol-atom	Pyrolusite (MnO2)	298.15	experimental	solution	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Shomate 1943 doi	Table 11, p. 16, row 38 report
-166.913 kJ/mol-atom	Pyrolusite (MnO2)	298.15	experimental	combusion	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Mixter 1910 doi	Table 11, p. 16, row 35 report
-166.913 kJ/mol-atom	MnO2	298.15	experimental	combustion	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Mixter 1910 doi	Table 11, p. 16, row 80 report
-174 kJ/mol-atom	Pyrolusite (MnO2)	298.15	model	assessed	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Knacke 1991	Table 11, p. 16, row 43 report
-174 kJ/mol-atom	MnO2	298.15	model	assessed	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Knacke 1991	Table 11, p. 16, row 88 report
-173.753 kJ/mol-atom	Pyrolusite (MnO2)	298.15	model	assessed	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Rossini 1952	Table 11, p. 16, row 39 report
-173.753 kJ/mol-atom	MnO2	298.15	model	assessed	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Rossini 1952	Table 11, p. 16, row 84 report
-173.633 kJ/mol-atom	Pyrolusite (MnO2)	298.15	model	assessed	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Kubaschewski 1993	Table 11, p. 16, row 44 report
-173.633 kJ/mol-atom	MnO2	298.15	model	assessed	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Kubaschewski 1993	Table 11, p. 16, row 89 report
-173.613 kJ/mol-atom	MnO2	298.15	model	assessed	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Mah 1960	Table 11, p. 16, row 86 report
-173.613 kJ/mol-atom	Pyrolusite (MnO2)	298.15	model	assessed	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Mah 1960	Table 11, p. 16, row 41 report
-173.493 kJ/mol-atom	MnO2	298.15	model	assessed	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003	Table 11, p. 16, row 90 report
-173.493 kJ/mol-atom	Pyrolusite (MnO2)	298.15	model	assessed	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003	Table 11, p. 16, row 45 report
-173.46 kJ/mol-atom	Pyrolusite (MnO2)	298.15	model	assessed	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Pankratz 1982	Table 11, p. 16, row 42 report
-173.46 kJ/mol-atom	MnO2	298.15	model	assessed	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Pankratz 1982	Table 11, p. 16, row 87 report
-173.333 kJ/mol-atom	Pyrolusite (MnO2)	298.15	model	assessed	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Brewer 1953 doi	Table 11, p. 16, row 40 report
-173.333 kJ/mol-atom	MnO2	298.15	model	assessed	Mn–O	[1] Grundy 2003 cites Brewer 1953 doi	Table 11, p. 16, row 85 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 MnO2
Value	Unit	Reading	Method (class, basis)	Effective
-175.007	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	1 (combustion_calorimetry, cleaned_below_threshold)	1
-175.007	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	1 (combustion_calorimetry, cleaned_below_threshold)	1
-175.007	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	1 (combustion_calorimetry, cleaned_below_threshold)	1
-175.007	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	1 (combustion_calorimetry, cleaned_below_threshold)	1
-174.73	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	1 (combustion_calorimetry, cleaned_below_threshold)	1
-174.73	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	1 (combustion_calorimetry, cleaned_below_threshold)	1
-173.947	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	3.2 (solution_reaction_calorimetry, calibrated)	3.2
-173.947	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	3.2 (solution_reaction_calorimetry, calibrated)	3.2
-166.913	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	1 (combustion_calorimetry, cleaned_below_threshold)	1
-166.913	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	1 (combustion_calorimetry, cleaned_below_threshold)	1
-174	kJ/mol-atom	0.01667	3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)	3.9
-174	kJ/mol-atom	0.01667	3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)	3.9
-173.753	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)	3.9
-173.753	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)	3.9
-173.633	kJ/mol-atom	0.01667	3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)	3.9
-173.633	kJ/mol-atom	0.01667	3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)	3.9
-173.613	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)	3.9
-173.613	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)	3.9
-173.493	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)	3.9
-173.493	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)	3.9
-173.46	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)	3.9
-173.46	kJ/mol-atom	0.001667	3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)	3.9
-173.333	kJ/mol-atom	0.1667	3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)	3.9
-173.333	kJ/mol-atom	0.01667	3.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)	3.9

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 MnO2
Source	Entry	kJ/mol-atom	eV/atom	Space group	E above hull (kJ/mol-atom)	E above hull (eV/atom)	Theoretical
Materials Project	mp-aaaabcrz	-174.236	-1.80583	I4/m	-0	-0	no
OQMD	oqmd-677684	-168.93	-1.75084	I4/m	-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. Nicholas Grundy, Bengt Hallstedt, Ludwig J. Gauckler, Assessment of the Mn-O system, JPE 24, 21-39 (2003). doi:10.1007/s11669-003-0004-6

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}
}