Fe–Sb system

80 accepted literature values from 3 paper(s) (experimental 54, model 13, unspecified 13); 3 calculated phase diagram(s). 21 further extracted value(s) not accepted by the reader-agreement checks are only in the JSON/CSV.

Data: JSON · CSV · interactive explorer · interactive phase diagram · phases (7) · papers (bibliography) · Markdown

Accepted values by evidence class
Evidence class	Values
experimental	54
model	13
unspecified	13

Accepted values by property group
Property group	Values
invariant reaction	59
phase transition	14
phase equilibrium	6
formation	1

Calculated phase diagrams

Binary phase diagrams calculated with pycalphad 0.11.2 from the SGTE binary collection (Hallstedt 2025, CC BY 4.0). Evidence class: model.

Assessments with a calculated phase diagram
TDB file	Assessment	SHA-256	Links
FeSb-08Boa.tdb	D. Boa, S. Hassam, G. Kra, K.P. Kotchi, J. Rogez, Calphad, 32, 227-39(2008). doi:10.1016/j.calphad.2008.01.001	`67f3cb0310dccf1b94fb6bb81adf5611be79d7d462beeee220b56651c2d98a60`	viewer · TDB · JSON
FeSb-14Li.tdb	C. Li, D. Zhu, Y. Zhang, Z. Du, C. Guo, J. Li, J.-C. Tedenac, Calphad, 47, 23-34(2014). doi:10.1016/j.calphad.2014.05.005	`8512f95ce9460d4950e93aeba402869f73b6e10a660930a7633464588d28e8bf`	viewer · TDB · JSON
FeSb-95Pei-LB.tdb	B. Pei, B. Bjorkman, B. Sundman, B. Jansson, Calphad, 19, 1-15(1995). doi:10.1016/0364-5916(95)00001-U	`75ce69413b04b2fe92b8edc70c4cd62aa6f4b53b9036544b715d95bfd0721460`	viewer · TDB · JSON

Calculated three-phase invariants (model, mole fraction of the second component)
TDB file	T (K)	Phases at the invariant
FeSb-08Boa.tdb	1280.37	BCC_A2 (x(Sb) 0.0532) + LIQUID (x(Sb) 0.33236) + FESB_B81 (x(Sb) 0.4032)
FeSb-08Boa.tdb	1020.29	FESB_B81 (x(Sb) 0.48286) + FESB2_C18 (x(Sb) 0.66667) + LIQUID (x(Sb) 0.89819)
FeSb-08Boa.tdb	897.68	FESB2_C18 (x(Sb) 0.66667) + LIQUID (x(Sb) 0.98125) + RHOMBOHEDRAL_A7 (x(Sb) 1)
FeSb-08Boa.tdb	897.68	FESB2_C18 (x(Sb) 0.66667) + LIQUID (x(Sb) 0.98151) + RHOMBOHEDRAL_A7 (x(Sb) 1)
FeSb-14Li.tdb	1283.38	BCC_A2 (x(Sb) 0.05903) + LIQUID (x(Sb) 0.32968) + FESB_B81 (x(Sb) 0.42164)
FeSb-14Li.tdb	1021.34	FESB_B81 (x(Sb) 0.49486) + FESB2_C18 (x(Sb) 0.66667) + LIQUID (x(Sb) 0.88054)
FeSb-14Li.tdb	900.29	FESB2_C18 (x(Sb) 0.66667) + LIQUID (x(Sb) 0.98904) + RHOMBOHEDRAL_A7 (x(Sb) 1)
FeSb-14Li.tdb	900.29	FESB2_C18 (x(Sb) 0.66667) + LIQUID (x(Sb) 0.98913) + RHOMBOHEDRAL_A7 (x(Sb) 1)
FeSb-95Pei-LB.tdb	1271.52	BCC_A2 (x(Sb) 0.05257) + LIQUID (x(Sb) 0.32514) + FESB_B81 (x(Sb) 0.40714)
FeSb-95Pei-LB.tdb	1018.89	FESB_B81 (x(Sb) 0.48452) + FESB2_C18 (x(Sb) 0.66667) + LIQUID (x(Sb) 0.89517)
FeSb-95Pei-LB.tdb	897.75	FESB2_C18 (x(Sb) 0.66667) + LIQUID (x(Sb) 0.98097) + RHOMBOHEDRAL_A7 (x(Sb) 1)
FeSb-95Pei-LB.tdb	897.75	FESB2_C18 (x(Sb) 0.66667) + LIQUID (x(Sb) 0.98123) + RHOMBOHEDRAL_A7 (x(Sb) 1)

Convex hulls: Materials Project DFT hull · OQMD DFT hull · CALPHAD hull FeSb-08Boa · CALPHAD hull FeSb-95Pei-LB

Invariant reactions (literature)

Invariant reactions reported in the literature for the Fe–Sb system (59)
T (K)	Reaction / phases	Compositions (mole fraction)	Class	Source	Location	Quote
1423	polymorphic: γ(Fe) -> α(Fe)	γ(Fe): Sb 0.0116; α(Fe): Sb 0.0168	model	[1] Li 2014	Table 2, p. 3, row 6 report
1423	polymorphic: γ(Fe) -> α(Fe)	γ(Fe): Sb 0.007; α(Fe): Sb 0.014	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Nageswararso 1974	Table 2, p. 3, row 2 report
1423	polymorphic: γ(Fe) -> α(Fe)	α(Fe): Sb 0.021	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Jones 1934	Table 2, p. 3, row 1 report
1423	polymorphic: γ(Fe) -> α(Fe)	γ(Fe): Sb 0.0093; α(Fe): Sb 0.0022	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Svechnikov 1938	Table 2, p. 3, row 3 report
1423	polymorphic: γ(Fe) -> α(Fe)	γ(Fe): Sb 0.011; α(Fe): Sb 0.0168	unspecified	[1] Li 2014 cites Kubaschewski 1982	Table 2, p. 3, row 5 report
1423	polymorphic: γ(Fe) -> α(Fe)	γ(Fe): Sb 0.0096; α(Fe): Sb 0.017	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Hillert 1967	Table 2, p. 3, row 4 report
1303.39	congruent melting: Liq -> β(FeSb)	L: Sb 0.4289; β(FeSb): Sb 0.4289	model	[1] Li 2014	Table 2, p. 3, row 22 report
1298	congruent melting: Liq -> β(FeSb)	L: Sb 0.43; β(FeSb): Sb 0.43	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Richter 1997 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 20 report
1298	congruent melting: Liq -> β(FeSb)	L: Fe 0.5, Sb 0.5; β(FeSb): Fe 0.5, Sb 0.5	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Hagg 1929	Table 2, p. 3, row 21 report
1293	congruent melting: Liq -> β(FeSb)	L: Sb 0.44; β(FeSb): Sb 0.44	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Vogel 1935	Table 2, p. 3, row 16 report
1292	congruent melting: Liq -> β(FeSb)	L: Sb 0.42; β(FeSb): Sb 0.42	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Maier 1972	Table 2, p. 3, row 17 report
1292	congruent melting: Liq -> β(FeSb)	L: Sb 0.42; β(FeSb): Sb 0.42	unspecified	[1] Li 2014 cites Kubaschewski 1982	Table 2, p. 3, row 18 report
1287	congruent melting: Liq -> β(FeSb)	L: Sb 0.394; β(FeSb): Sb 0.394	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Kurnakow 1908 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 15 report
1283	congruent melting: Liq -> β(FeSb)	L: Sb 0.44; β(FeSb): Sb 0.44	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Feschotte 1989 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 19 report
1282.15	eutectic: Liq = αFe + ε-FeSb	Liq: Sb 0.33; αFe: Sb 0.09; ε-FeSb: Sb 0.4	experimental	[2] Boa 2008 cites Richter 1997 doi	Table 10, p. 9, row 5 report
1282	eutectic: Liq -> α(Fe) + β(FeSb)	L: Sb 0.33; β(FeSb): Sb 0.44	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Richter 1997 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 12 report
1280.15	eutectic: Liq -> α(Fe) + β(FeSb)		experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Hagg 1929	Table 2, p. 3, row 13 report
1280.15	eutectic: Liq = αFe + ε-FeSb	ε-FeSb: Sb 0.5	experimental	[2] Boa 2008	Table 10, p. 9, row 4 report
1280.03	eutectic: Liq -> α(Fe) + β(FeSb)	L: Sb 0.3313; α(Fe): Sb 0.0594; β(FeSb): Sb 0.4212	model	[1] Li 2014	Table 2, p. 3, row 14 report
1280	eutectic: Liq = αFe + ε-FeSb	Liq: Sb 0.3323; αFe: Sb 0.0532; ε-FeSb: Sb 0.4032	model	[2] Boa 2008	Table 10, p. 9, row 3 report
1276	eutectic: Liq -> α(Fe) + β(FeSb)	L: Sb 0.34; α(Fe): Sb 0.09; β(FeSb): Sb 0.41	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Feschotte 1989 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 11 report
1275	eutectic: Liq -> α(Fe) + β(FeSb)	L: Sb 0.323; α(Fe): Sb 0.024; β(FeSb): Sb 0.354	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Kurnakow 1908 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 7 report
1271	eutectic: L = α-Fe + ε-FeSb	L: Sb 0.3252; α-Fe: Sb 0.0526; ε-FeSb: Sb 0.4072	model	[3] Pei 1995	Table 3, p. 8, row 4 report
1269	eutectic: L = α-Fe + ε-FeSb	L: Sb 0.346; α-Fe: Sb 0.05; ε-FeSb: Sb 0.4	unspecified	[3] Pei 1995 cites Massalski	Table 3, p. 8, row 6 report
1269	eutectic: Liq -> α(Fe) + β(FeSb)	L: Sb 0.346; α(Fe): Sb 0.05; β(FeSb): Sb 0.39	unspecified	[1] Li 2014 cites Kubaschewski 1982	Table 2, p. 3, row 10 report
1269	eutectic: L = α-Fe + ε-FeSb	L: Sb 0.346; α-Fe: Sb 0.05; ε-FeSb: Sb 0.39	unspecified	[3] Pei 1995 cites ref. 3	Table 3, p. 8, row 5 report
1269	eutectic: Liq -> α(Fe) + β(FeSb)	L: Sb 0.346; α(Fe): Sb 0.154; β(FeSb): Sb 0.39	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Maier 1972	Table 2, p. 3, row 9 report
1261	eutectic: Liq -> α(Fe) + β(FeSb)	L: Sb 0.382	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Geller 1939 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 8 report
1023.15	peritectic: Liq + ε-FeSb = FeSb2	Liq: Sb 0.9; ε-FeSb: Sb 0.481; FeSb2: Sb 0.6667	experimental	[2] Boa 2008 cites Richter 1997 doi	Table 10, p. 9, row 8 report
1023	peritectic: Liq + β(FeSb) -> ζ2FeSb2	L: Sb 0.9; β(FeSb): Fe 0.5, Sb 0.5; ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.667	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Richter 1997 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 29 report
1022.44	peritectic: Liq + β(FeSb) -> ζ2FeSb2	L: Sb 0.8743; β(FeSb): Sb 0.4937; ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.6667	model	[1] Li 2014	Table 2, p. 3, row 31 report
1022.15	peritectic: Liq + ε-FeSb = FeSb2	ε-FeSb: Sb 0.5; FeSb2: Sb 0.6667	experimental	[2] Boa 2008	Table 10, p. 9, row 7 report
1022.15	peritectic: Liq + β(FeSb) -> ζ2FeSb2	β(FeSb): Fe 0.5, Sb 0.5; ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.667	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Hagg 1929	Table 2, p. 3, row 30 report
1020	peritectic: Liq + ε-FeSb = FeSb2	Liq: Sb 0.8982; ε-FeSb: Sb 0.4829; FeSb2: Sb 0.6667	model	[2] Boa 2008	Table 10, p. 9, row 6 report
1019	peritectic: Liq + β(FeSb) -> ζ2FeSb2	L: Sb 0.856; β(FeSb): Sb 0.49; ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.667	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Feschotte 1989 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 28 report
1019	peritectic: L + ε-FeSb = FeSb2	L: Sb 0.8949; ε-FeSb: Sb 0.4845; FeSb2: Sb 0.6667	model	[3] Pei 1995	Table 3, p. 8, row 7 report
1018	peritectic		experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Kjekshus 1977 doi	p. 2 report	Refs. [31,39,40,45] identified and confirmed the existence of the intermediate phase ζ2FeSb2 and Refs. [34,46] measured its peritectic temperature at 1011 K and 1018 K, respectively.
1018	peritectic: Liq + β(FeSb) -> ζ2FeSb2	β(FeSb): Fe 0.5, Sb 0.5; ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.667	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Kjekshus 1977 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 27 report
1011	peritectic: L + ε-FeSb = FeSb2	L: Sb 0.888; ε-FeSb: Sb 0.47; FeSb2: Sb 0.6667	unspecified	[3] Pei 1995 cites Massalski	Table 3, p. 8, row 9 report
1011	peritectic: L + ε-FeSb = FeSb2	L: Sb 0.888; ε-FeSb: Sb 0.465; FeSb2: Sb 0.6667	unspecified	[3] Pei 1995 cites ref. 3	Table 3, p. 8, row 8 report
1011	peritectic: Liq + β(FeSb) -> ζ2FeSb2	L: Sb 0.888; β(FeSb): Sb 0.487; ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.667	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Maier 1972	Table 2, p. 3, row 25 report
1011	peritectic: Liq + β(FeSb) -> ζ2FeSb2	L: Sb 0.888; β(FeSb): Fe 0.5, Sb 0.5; ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.667	unspecified	[1] Li 2014 cites Kubaschewski 1982	Table 2, p. 3, row 26 report
1011	peritectic		experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Maier 1972	p. 2 report	Refs. [31,39,40,45] identified and confirmed the existence of the intermediate phase ζ2FeSb2 and Refs. [34,46] measured its peritectic temperature at 1011 K and 1018 K, respectively.
1005	peritectic: Liq + β(FeSb) -> ζ2FeSb2	L: Sb 0.861; β(FeSb): Sb 0.394; ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.667	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Kurnakow 1908 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 23 report
1003	peritectic: Liq + β(FeSb) -> ζ2FeSb2	L: Sb 0.861; β(FeSb): Fe 0.5, Sb 0.5; ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.667	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Geller 1939 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 24 report
901	eutectic: L = FeSb2 + α-Sb	L: Sb 0.992; FeSb2: Sb 0.6667; α-Sb: Sb 1	unspecified	[3] Pei 1995 cites Massalski	Table 3, p. 8, row 12 report
901	eutectic: Liq -> ζ2FeSb2 + Sb	L: Sb 0.968; ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.667; Sb: Sb 1	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Kurnakow 1908 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 32 report
900.28	eutectic: Liq -> ζ2FeSb2 + Sb	L: Sb 0.9891; ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.6667; Sb: Sb 1	model	[1] Li 2014	Table 2, p. 3, row 39 report
898	eutectic: Liq = FeSb2 + Sb	Liq: Sb 0.9815; FeSb2: Sb 0.6667; Sb: Sb 1	model	[2] Boa 2008	Table 10, p. 9, row 9 report
898	eutectic: L = FeSb2 + α-Sb	L: Sb 0.9812; FeSb2: Sb 0.6667; α-Sb: Sb 1	model	[3] Pei 1995	Table 3, p. 8, row 10 report
897.15	eutectic: Liq = FeSb2 + Sb	Liq: Sb 0.968; FeSb2: Sb 0.6667; Sb: Sb 1	experimental	[2] Boa 2008 cites Richter 1997 doi	Table 10, p. 9, row 11 report
897.15	eutectic: Liq = FeSb2 + Sb	FeSb2: Sb 0.6667; Sb: Sb 1	experimental	[2] Boa 2008	Table 10, p. 9, row 10 report
897	eutectic: Liq -> ζ2FeSb2 + Sb	ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.667	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Hagg 1929	Table 2, p. 3, row 38 report
897	eutectic: Liq -> ζ2FeSb2 + Sb	ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.667; Sb: Sb 1	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Richter 1997 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 37 report
894	eutectic: Liq -> ζ2FeSb2 + Sb	L: Sb 0.965; ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.667; Sb: Sb 1	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Feschotte 1989 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 36 report
892	eutectic: Liq -> ζ2FeSb2 + Sb	L: Sb 0.982; ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.667; Sb: Sb 1	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Geller 1939 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 33 report
887	eutectic: Liq -> ζ2FeSb2 + Sb	L: Sb 0.992; ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.667; Sb: Sb 1	unspecified	[1] Li 2014 cites Kubaschewski 1982	Table 2, p. 3, row 35 report
887	eutectic: L = FeSb2 + α-Sb	L: Sb 0.992; FeSb2: Sb 0.6667; α-Sb: Sb 1	unspecified	[3] Pei 1995 cites ref. 3	Table 3, p. 8, row 11 report
887	eutectic: Liq -> ζ2FeSb2 + Sb	L: Sb 0.992; ζ2FeSb2: Sb 0.667; Sb: Sb 1	experimental	[1] Li 2014 cites Maier 1972	Table 2, p. 3, row 34 report

Formation enthalpies

Literature values in kJ/mol-atom where the per-atom basis is known. DFT columns: the lowest-energy entry at the same composition (Materials Project 2026.04.13, OQMD v1.8; different energy references, never averaged), from dft_parity.json.

Enthalpies of formation, Fe–Sb system (1)
Phase	Compound	Value	T (K)	Class	MP DFT (kJ/mol-atom)	OQMD DFT (kJ/mol-atom)	Source	Location	Quote
FeSb		2.999 unspecified ± 1.385	1068	experimental			[2] Boa 2008 cites Predel 1978 doi	p. 4 report	Predel and Vogelbein [41] used solution calorimetry at 1068 K and determined the enthalpies of formation of the ε-FeSb phase at 45 at.% Sb and at 43 at.% Sb to be about (2.999 ± 1.385) and -(0.044 ± 1.234) kJ/g atom, respectively.

Other properties

Phase transition (14)

Phase transition, Fe–Sb system
Property	Value	T (K)	Phases / composition	Class	Source	Location	Quote
Phase transition	897.15 K	897.15	eutectic: L = FeSb2 + Sb (e2) alloy: Fe 0.33, Sb 0.67	experimental	[2] Boa 2008	Table 2, p. 3, row 9 report
Phase transition	897.15 K	897.15	eutectic: L = FeSb2 + Sb(e2) alloy: Fe 0.3, Sb 0.7	experimental	[2] Boa 2008 cites Richter 1997 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 12 report
Phase transition	1022.15 K	1022.15	peritectic: L + ε-FeSb = FeSb2(p1) alloy: Fe 0.33, Sb 0.67	experimental	[2] Boa 2008	Table 2, p. 3, row 10 report
Phase transition	1022.15 K	1022.15	peritectic: L + ε-FeSb = FeSb2(p1) alloy: Fe 0.3, Sb 0.7	experimental	[2] Boa 2008 cites Richter 1997 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 13 report
Phase transition	1038 K	1038	magnetic	experimental	[3] Pei 1995 cites Maier 1972	p. 4 report	Tc of aFe + s-FeSb two phase region is 1038 K [20].
Phase transition	1279.15 K	1279.15	other: L = ε-FeSb (solidus) alloy: Fe 0.55, Sb 0.45	experimental	[2] Boa 2008 cites Richter 1997 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 6 report
Phase transition	1280.15 K	1280.15	eutectic: L = ε-FeSb + αFe(e1) alloy: Fe 0.65, Sb 0.35	experimental	[2] Boa 2008	Table 2, p. 3, row 1 report
Phase transition	1282.15 K	1282.15	other: L = ε-FeSb (solidus) alloy: Fe 0.55, Sb 0.45	experimental	[2] Boa 2008	Table 2, p. 3, row 5 report
Phase transition	1283.15 K	1283.15	eutectic: L = ε-FeSb + αFe(e1) alloy: Fe 0.65, Sb 0.35	experimental	[2] Boa 2008 cites Richter 1997 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 2 report
Phase transition	1290 K	1290	congruent melting: ε-FeSb = L ε-FeSb: Sb 0.4258; L: Sb 0.4258	model	[3] Pei 1995	Table 3, p. 8, row 1 report
Phase transition	1291 K	1291	congruent melting: ε-FeSb = Liq ε-FeSb: Sb 0.4168; Liq: Sb 0.4168	model	[2] Boa 2008	Table 10, p. 9, row 1 report
Phase transition	1292 K	1292	congruent melting: ε-FeSb = L ε-FeSb: Sb 0.42; L: Sb 0.42	unspecified	[3] Pei 1995 cites Massalski	Table 3, p. 8, row 3 report
Phase transition	1292 K	1292	congruent melting: ε-FeSb = L ε-FeSb: Sb 0.42; L: Sb 0.42	unspecified	[3] Pei 1995 cites ref. 3	Table 3, p. 8, row 2 report
Phase transition	1298.15 K	1298.15	congruent melting: ε-FeSb = Liq ε-FeSb: Sb 0.43; Liq: Sb 0.43	experimental	[2] Boa 2008 cites Richter 1997 doi	Table 10, p. 9, row 2 report

Phase equilibrium (6)

Phase equilibrium, Fe–Sb system
Property	T (K)	Phases / composition	Class	Source	Location
Phase composition	1204.15	other: L = ε-FeSb (liquidus) liquid: Fe 0.3, Sb 0.7	experimental	[2] Boa 2008 cites Richter 1997 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 14 report
Phase composition	1222.15	other: L = ε-FeSb (liquidus) liquid: Fe 0.33, Sb 0.67	experimental	[2] Boa 2008	Table 2, p. 3, row 11 report
Phase composition	1293.15	other: L = ε-FeSb (liquidus) liquid: Fe 0.65, Sb 0.35	experimental	[2] Boa 2008	Table 2, p. 3, row 3 report
Phase composition	1295.15	other: L = ε-FeSb (liquidus) liquid: Fe 0.65, Sb 0.35	experimental	[2] Boa 2008 cites Richter 1997 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 4 report
Phase composition	1307.15	other: L = ε-FeSb (liquidus) liquid: Fe 0.55, Sb 0.45	experimental	[2] Boa 2008 cites Richter 1997 doi	Table 2, p. 3, row 8 report
Phase composition	1309.15	other: L = ε-FeSb (liquidus) liquid: Fe 0.55, Sb 0.45	experimental	[2] Boa 2008	Table 2, p. 3, row 7 report

Sources

Reporting papers the values were read from (a value cited from another work names that work in its row).

Changrong Li, Daiman Zhu, Yubi Zhang, Zhenmin Du, Cuiping Guo, Junqin Li et al., Thermodynamic assessment of the Co–Fe–Sb system, Calphad 47, 23-34 (2014). doi:10.1016/j.calphad.2014.05.005
D. Boa, S. Hassam, G. Kra, K.P. Kotchi, J. Rogez, The ternary bismuth–iron–antimony system: Experimental phase diagram study and thermodynamic evaluation, Calphad 32, 227-239 (2008). doi:10.1016/j.calphad.2008.01.001
Benyan Pei, Bo Björkman, Bo Sundman, Bo Jansson, A thermodynamic assessment of the iron — Antimony system, Calphad 19, 1-15 (1995). doi:10.1016/0364-5916(95)00001-u

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-Diagrams: calculated binary phase diagrams (version 2026.10), Zenodo (2026). doi:10.5281/zenodo.23735859
R. Arróyave, J. Saal, D. Shin, ORCHID-Hulls: binary convex hulls (Materials Project, OQMD, assessed CALPHAD) (version 2026.10), Zenodo (2026). doi:10.5281/zenodo.23735891
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); 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; 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). 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_phase_diagrams_2026,
  author    = {Arr{\'o}yave, Raymundo and Saal, James and Shin, Dongwon},
  title     = {{ORCHID-Diagrams: calculated binary phase diagrams}},
  version   = {2026.10},
  publisher = {Zenodo},
  year      = {2026},
  doi       = {10.5281/zenodo.23735859},
  url       = {https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23735859}
}

@misc{orchid_hulls_2026,
  author    = {Arr{\'o}yave, Raymundo and Saal, James and Shin, Dongwon},
  title     = {{ORCHID-Hulls: binary convex hulls (Materials Project, OQMD, assessed CALPHAD)}},
  version   = {2026.10},
  publisher = {Zenodo},
  year      = {2026},
  doi       = {10.5281/zenodo.23735891},
  url       = {https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23735891}
}

@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}
}