<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<documents xmlns='http://eprints.org/ep2/data/2.0'>
  <document id='https://researchdata.bath.ac.uk/id/document/13467'>
    <docid>13467</docid>
    <rev_number>2</rev_number>
    <files>
      <file id='https://researchdata.bath.ac.uk/id/file/41504'>
        <fileid>41504</fileid>
        <datasetid>document</datasetid>
        <objectid>13467</objectid>
        <filename>Fig7_expt_vs_CON_vs_RCN.ogg</filename>
        <mime_type>application/octet-stream</mime_type>
        <hash>c61fb2649d980aaf40044ec620cc139e</hash>
        <hash_type>MD5</hash_type>
        <filesize>70251</filesize>
        <mtime>2020-08-28 09:11:56</mtime>
        <url>https://researchdata.bath.ac.uk/902/7/Fig7_expt_vs_CON_vs_RCN.ogg</url>
      </file>
    </files>
    <eprintid>902</eprintid>
    <pos>7</pos>
    <placement>7</placement>
    <mime_type>application/octet-stream</mime_type>
    <format>other</format>
    <formatdesc>Figure 7 shows the differences between the measured coordination numbers bar{n} or bar{n}_{gamma} and those calculated using the CON (black markers) and RCN (red markers) models for glassy As_{0.30}Se_{0.70} (squares), As_{0.35}Se_{0.65} (circles) and As_{0.40}Se_{0.60} (triangles).</formatdesc>
    <language>en</language>
    <security>public</security>
    <license>cc_by</license>
    <main>Fig7_expt_vs_CON_vs_RCN.ogg</main>
    <content>data</content>
  </document>
</documents>
