Ru2Sm: enthalpy of formation

9 accepted literature formation-enthalpy value(s) (model 5, DFT 2, unspecified 2); Materials Project -21.247 kJ/mol-atom (mp-aaacksvm); OQMD -20.066 kJ/mol-atom (oqmd-1375455).

Systems: Ru–Sm

Literature values

Enthalpy of formation of Ru2Sm reported in the literature (9)
ValuePhase as printedT (K)ClassMethodSystemSourceLocationQuote
-66.9039 kJ/mol-atomSmRu2modelOptimization LMRu–Sm[1] Kardellass 2023Table 3, p. 9, row 69
report
-45.7907 kJ/mol-atomSmRu2modelMiedema’s modelRu–Sm[1] Kardellass 2023
cites De 2014
Table 3, p. 9, row 72
report
-36.702 kJ/mol-atomSmRu2modelOptimization EMRu–Sm[1] Kardellass 2023Table 3, p. 9, row 70
report
-36.0316 kJ/mol-atomSmRu2modelModified Miedema’s modelRu–Sm[1] Kardellass 2023
cites Zhang 2007 doi
Table 3, p. 9, row 73
report
-34.0161 kJ/mol-atomSmRu2modelOptimization CMRu–Sm[1] Kardellass 2023Table 3, p. 9, row 71
report
-19.177 kJ/mol-atomSmRu2DFTAb-initioRu–Sm[1] Kardellass 2023
cites Ceder 2010
Table 3, p. 9, row 74
report
-17.828 kJ/mol-atomSmRu2DFTAb-initioRu–Sm[1] Kardellass 2023
cites Oses 2018 doi
Table 3, p. 9, row 76
report
-21.297 kJ/mol-atomSmRu2unspecifiedRu–Sm[1] Kardellass 2023Table 3, p. 9, row 75
report
-20.044 kJ/mol-atomSmRu2unspecifiedRu–Sm[1] Kardellass 2023Table 3, p. 9, row 77
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 Ru2Sm
ValueUnitPrintedReadingMethod (class, basis)CompositionScatterConversionEffective
-66.9039kJ/mol-atom5.000e-53.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-45.7907kJ/mol-atom5.000e-63.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-36.702kJ/mol-atom5.000e-43.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-36.0316kJ/mol-atom5.000e-63.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-34.0161kJ/mol-atom5.000e-63.9 (model_calculated, calibrated)3.9
-19.177kJ/mol-atom5.000e-48.395 (dft, calibrated)8.395
-17.828kJ/mol-atom5.000e-48.395 (dft, calibrated)8.395
-21.297kJ/mol-atom5.000e-43.5 (unknown, calibrated)3.5
-20.044kJ/mol-atom5.000e-43.5 (unknown, calibrated)3.5

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 Ru2Sm
SourceEntrykJ/mol-atomeV/atomSpace groupE above hull (kJ/mol-atom)E above hull (eV/atom)Theoretical
Materials Projectmp-aaacksvm-21.247-0.220206P6_3/mmc00no
OQMDoqmd-1375455-20.066-0.207968P63/mmc00yes

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. S. Kardellass, C. Corvalan-Moya, V. P. Vassiliev, Thermodynamic Modeling of the (Ce and Sm)-Ru Binary Systems Based on Linear, Exponential, and Combined Models Aided by Ab-Initio Calculations, J. Phase Equilib. Diffus. 44, 300-323 (2023). doi:10.1007/s11669-023-01043-1