{"id":"d07a2453-9484-4def-ae85-1c3b1578366e","arxiv_id":"2508.05010","paper_version":1,"verdict":"CONDITIONAL","confidence":"MODERATE","novelty_score":5.0,"correctness_risk":"medium","formal_verification":"none","parameter_count":4,"one_line_summary":"Five new Re-Os high-entropy alloys are shown to be type-II superconductors with Tc between 4.2 and 5.1 K, plus a contested strong-correlation signature.","lead":"Five new rhenium-osmium high-entropy alloys were synthesized and found to superconduct at 4.2 to 5.1 K, with a noncentrosymmetric structure and resistance to a month in acid. The results add new materials to the high-entropy alloy superconductor family and suggest electron count as a tuning knob.","discovery_kind":"extension","skeptic_critique":{"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","headline":"Strong-correlation claim rests on a KWR that is mis-united, unreliable in RRR≈1 samples, and contradicted by the paper's own m*≈0.34me; the superconductivity finding itself is plausible.","rationale":"The reader's weakest assumption—that the KWR computed from fitted A and γ is a valid measure of electron-electron correlations in these disordered alloys—is indeed the most load-bearing weakness of the central 'strongly correlated' claim. I agree that the superconductivity finding itself is well supported by resistivity, magnetization, and specific-heat data, with ΔC/γTc ≈ 1.4 and near-100% shielding fractions. The numerical KWR inconsistency the reader noted is real: the printed values are in mJ-based units and require an unstated ×10^6 conversion to match the quoted transition-metal and heavy-fermion benchmarks. The deeper concern, which I add, is that the KWR-based strong-correlation conclusion is internally inconsistent with the paper's own effective-mass and Uemura-plot analysis: m* ≈ 0.34 me and Tc/TF ≈ 1.1×10^-4 place these alloys far from any strong-correlation regime. That inconsistency means the 'strongly correlated' label cannot be accepted without resolving which analysis is wrong. A direct refit of the resistivity with n free would settle whether A—and hence the corrected KWR—is physically robust. Since this concern affects the headline interpretation but not the basic discovery of new superconducting alloys, the reader's CONDITIONAL verdict remains appropriate; no verdict change is needed.","tokens_in":18972,"tokens_out":5905,"duration_ms":73783,"concrete_test":"Refit the published ρ(T) data for each of the five alloys over 10–50 K with n as a free parameter (and optionally including a T³ phonon term), then recompute KWR = A/γ² using γ from §3.4 and applying the correct mJ→J conversion (×10^6). If for any sample n departs substantially from 2, the 95% confidence interval of A overlaps zero, or the corrected KWR falls below the heavy-fermion benchmark a_HF = 10 μΩ cm mol² K² J^-2, the strong-correlation claim is unsupported. If A is robust and corrected KWR > 10 while m* ≈ 0.34 me persists, the internal inconsistency stands and requires resolution before the claim can be accepted.","verdict_should_be":"UNCHANGED","load_bearing_attack":"The load-bearing part of the headline claim is 'strong electronic correlations.' It rests almost entirely on the Kadowaki-Woods ratio, and that support is insecure on three counts. First, the printed KWR values (1.52×10^-4, 1.67×10^-4, ... μΩ cm mol² K² J^-2) are roughly 2600 times smaller than a_TM = 0.4 μΩ cm mol² K² J^-2 quoted in the same paragraph; they only become 'larger' than the benchmarks after an unstated ×10^6 conversion from mJ² to J². That is a correctable units error, but as written the paper's own numbers contradict its claim. Second, A is extracted from a 10–50 K fit on samples with RRR = 1.01–1.05 and ρ0 ≈ 400–824 μΩ cm. The normal-state resistivity is nearly temperature-independent, so the T² coefficient is a tiny residual deviation that can be dominated by phonon-assisted scattering, a small offset error, or the imposed n = 2 constraint. Third, the paper's own derived values m* ≈ 0.34 me and Tc/TF ≈ 1.1×10^-4 (Fig. 7d) are the opposite of a heavy-fermion/strong-correlation signature. A KWR above a_HF = 10 and an effective mass below the free-electron mass cannot both describe the same quasiparticle system; at least one analysis is wrong. Thus the title's 'strongly correlated' claim is not secure. The reported superconductivity itself—Tc ≈ 4.2–5.1 K, large diamagnetic shielding, and specific-heat jumps—is multi-probe supported and is not jeopardized by this concern.","agreement_with_reader":"partial"},"referee_report":{"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","summary":"The paper reports five previously unreported Re-Os-based alloys with nominal compositions Re3.5Os3.5Ta0.5Hf0.5Nb3, Re3Os3Ta0.5Hf0.5Nb3, Re3.5Os3.5Mo0.5Hf0.5Nb3, Re3Os3Mo0.5Hf0.5Nb3, and Re3.5Os3.5Mo0.5W0.5Nb3. The authors characterize the structure by powder XRD/Rietveld refinement, claiming a single noncentrosymmetric α-Mn (I-43m) phase, and probe superconductivity by electrical resistivity, magnetization, and specific heat. They report bulk type-II superconductivity with Tc values between 4.20 K and 5.11 K, near-100% diamagnetic shielding, specific-heat jumps close to the BCS weak-coupling value, upper critical fields below the Pauli limit, and negligible degradation after one month in HCl. They also report a VEC-dependent Tc trend and large Kadowaki-Woods ratios, which they interpret as evidence for strong electronic correlations. The central claim, as stated in the title and abstract, is that these are strongly correlated noncentrosymmetric high/medium-entropy alloy superconductors.","tokens_in":1942,"tokens_out":2306,"duration_ms":76730,"significance":"If the superconductivity characterization is correct, the work adds five new members to the small family of noncentrosymmetric α-Mn-type HEA superconductors and provides useful data on composition-dependent Tc and chemical stability. The multi-probe evidence (resistivity, magnetization, specific heat) for bulk superconductivity appears plausible and is a strength of the paper. However, the headline claim of strong electronic correlations is not currently supported. The printed KWR values are numerically inconsistent with the quoted benchmarks because of a units error; the resistivity coefficient A is extracted from samples with RRR≈1 and nearly temperature-independent resistivity, where a T2 term is not obviously intrinsic; and the paper's own effective-mass and Uemura-ratio analysis points to light quasiparticles, opposite to a strong-correlation interpretation. The superconductivity finding itself does not depend on the strong-correlation claim and could stand after revision, but the central claim as written overreaches the evidence.","major_comments":[{"comment":"The printed KWR values (1.52×10^-4, 1.67×10^-4, etc. μΩ cm mol² K² J^-2) are numerically equal to A/γ² when γ is expressed in mJ mol^-1 K^-2, not J^-2. Converting to J^-2 requires multiplying by 10^6. As written, the values are ~10^6 times smaller than the quoted transition-metal benchmark a_TM=0.4 μΩ cm mol² K² J^-2 and therefore contradict the claim of 'large KWR'. With the corrected conversion the values become ~10², which would be larger than a_TM, but this only highlights the need to re-evaluate whether A/γ² is a meaningful measure in these highly resistive, RRR≈1 alloys. The conclusion 'anomalously large KWR ... implying strong electronic correlations' is load-bearing and cannot be assessed until this units inconsistency is fixed and the comparison is redone with proper error treatment.","section":"Section 3.4, KWR paragraph and Figure 7b"},{"comment":"The coefficient A is obtained by fitting ρ(T) from 10 K to 50 K with a fixed power law n=2. The samples have RRR 1.01–1.05 and residual resistivity 400–824 μΩ cm, so the normal-state resistivity is almost temperature-independent and the T² term is a tiny residual deviation. Under these conditions, A can be dominated by a small baseline offset, phonon-assisted scattering, or the imposed n=2 constraint. The extracted A values vary by nearly an order of magnitude (2.35×10^-4 to 1.97×10^-3 μΩ cm K^-2) while γ varies only weakly, so the resulting KWR pattern may reflect fitting artifacts rather than electronic correlations. The paper should provide fit residuals, justify the n=2 range, and rule out phonon contributions before using A to support a strong-correlation claim. The authors themselves note that the large KWR 'may originate from impurity scattering', which further undermines the inte","section":"Section 3.2, resistivity fitting"},{"comment":"The paper derives m* ≈ 0.31–0.34 m_e and Tc/TF ≈ 1.1×10^-4 for two of the alloys, which is the opposite of a heavy-fermion/strong-correlation signature. A KWR above the heavy-fermion benchmark (10 μΩ cm mol² K² J^-2) and an effective mass below the free-electron mass cannot both describe the same quasiparticle system without a serious error in one of the analyses. In addition, the carrier density n used in the m* equation is stated but not derived in the text; it should be defined explicitly. Until this internal inconsistency is resolved, the claim of strong electronic correlations is not secure. This is a load-bearing inconsistency because the paper's central message depends on the KWR interpretation.","section":"Section 3.4, effective mass and Uemura plot (Fig. 7d)"},{"comment":"The λep values are computed from Tc using the inverted McMillan formula with a fixed μ* = 0.13, so the near-linear relation between Tc and λep is largely built into the defining formula rather than being an independent empirical finding. The statement 'the Tc of all HEAs is almost linearly related to λep' should be presented as a consequence of the model, not as a separate discovery. This is a presentation issue rather than fatal, but it should be corrected.","section":"Section 3.4, Tc vs λep (Figure 7c)"}],"minor_comments":[{"comment":"The formula for λep is garbled in the text; the parenthesized terms are missing. Please typeset it correctly.","section":"Display equation for McMillan formula"},{"comment":"The caption lists Re3Os3Ta0.5Hf0.5Nb3 twice and omits one of the five compositions. Check and correct.","section":"Figure 5 caption"},{"comment":"The row labeled ρ0 (μΩ cm) contains values like -3.43×10^-5 and 1.67×10^-4, which cannot be residual resistivities in μΩ cm. These appear to be KWR values misplaced in the table. Verify all entries.","section":"Table 2, ρ0 row"},{"comment":"The term 'MEAs-HEAs' is used inconsistently; define clearly which compositions are medium-entropy and which are high-entropy, and use a consistent abbreviation.","section":"General notation"},{"comment":"Reference [32] and [37] are the same paper; consolidate or cross-reference.","section":"Reference formatting"},{"comment":"The phrase 'Under the premise of given ρ0, A, γ' seems to contain a typo; ρ0 is not needed for KWR and appears to be an editing artifact.","section":"Section 3.4, KWR paragraph"}],"recommendation":"major_revision","confidential_remarks":"The superconductivity characterization is likely sound and valuable, but the title and abstract overclaim 'strongly correlated' on the basis of a KWR analysis that has a units error, an unreliable A coefficient, and a direct contradiction with the paper's own effective-mass result. These issues can be addressed by correcting the units, substantially tempering or removing the strong-correlation claim, and clearly separating the well-supported superconductivity results from the speculative correlation interpretation. The corrected KWR may still be large, but the physical meaning in RRR≈1 high-entropy alloys needs careful discussion. I would encourage the editor to seek a revised version rather than reject, because the empirical contribution is real."},"author_rebuttal":null,"desk_editor":{"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","letter":"Quick take: the superconductivity in these five new Re-Os-based alloys is plausibly real and well characterized by standard multiple probes. The paper's headline interpretation—that they are strongly correlated—rests on a Kadowaki-Woods ratio that is mis-united and internally inconsistent, and should be dropped or heavily revised.\n\nWhat's new: five unreported compositions in the α-Mn HEA family, with Tc between ~4.2 and 5.1 K. The data support bulk type-II superconductivity: sharp resistive transitions, large diamagnetic shielding (~100% volume fraction), and specific-heat jumps close to the BCS weak-coupling value. The acid-immersion stability test (one month in 0.5 M HCl, structure and superconductivity retained) is a useful empirical datapoint; I don't recall seeing that in the HEA-superconductor literature.\n\nSoft spots: the strong-correlation claim is the load-bearing part of the abstract and title, and it falls apart. The quoted KWR values (1.5–1.7×10⁻⁴ in the printed units) are about 2600 times smaller than the transition-metal benchmark (0.4) they are said to exceed. Either the units are wrong (mJ² vs J² requires a factor of 10⁶) or the claim is simply backwards. On top of that, A is extracted from a 10–50 K fit on samples with RRR ≈ 1.01–1.05 and residual resistivity near 800 μΩ·cm; in that regime the 'T²' term is a tiny residual and could easily be polluted by phonons or baseline offset. Finally, the paper's own derived m* ≈ 0.34me and Tc/TF ≈ 1.1×10⁻⁴ point away from strong correlations. You can't have a heavy-fermion-like KWR and a sub-free-electron mass in the same quasiparticle system. The authors should fix the units, re-examine the A extraction, and either present KWR as an empirical observation without interpretation or remove it. I'd also flag the anomalously large lattice parameter (10.42 Å) for one compound, unexplained, and the fact that Tc from resistivity, magnetization, and specific heat differ by up to ~0.7 K with no reconciliation. Minor: the Tc–λep 'trend' is largely built into the McMillan formula since λep is computed from Tc.\n\nBottom line: as a materials-discovery paper, this is fine and worth a serious referee. As a claim about strong correlations, it needs major revision. For someone tracking HEA superconductors, the new compounds and the acid-stability result are worth citing.","headline":"The five new Re-Os-based α-Mn HEA superconductors look real, but the 'strong correlations' headline does not survive contact with the data as written.","tokens_in":19917,"tokens_out":2338,"would_cite":true,"duration_ms":24958,"reading_group":"maybe","serious_thinker":"yes","would_accept_peer_review":true},"rs_alignment":null,"lean_confirmation":null,"pith_extraction":{"msc":[],"pacs":["74.70.Ad"],"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","headline":"Five new rhenium–osmium alloys superconduct in the noncentrosymmetric α-Mn structure at 4.20–5.11 K, with transition temperature rising with electron count and large Kadowaki–Woods ratios read as strong electronic correlations.","keywords":["high/medium-entropy alloys","superconductivity","noncentrosymmetric structure","α-Mn structure","strong electronic correlations","valence electron count","Kadowaki–Woods ratio","type-II superconductor"],"falsifier":"In the correlations discussion around Figure 7b, recompute $A/\\gamma^2$ from the tabulated $A$ and $\\gamma$ using the benchmark convention ($a_{\\mathrm{TM}} = 0.4$ μΩ cm mol² K² J⁻², with $\\gamma$ in J mol⁻¹ K⁻²). The printed ratios (≈$10^{-4}$) are reproduced only if $\\gamma$ is left in mJ mol⁻¹ K⁻²; the unit-consistent values come out near $10^2$, orders of magnitude above the heavy-fermion benchmark of 10. Whichever arithmetic is right, one of the two numbers is wrong, and the 'strongly correlated' claim stands or falls with it. A complementary check: measure $A$ in a more ordered compositi","tokens_in":18817,"feed_emoji":"🧲","tokens_out":18948,"duration_ms":175188,"temperature":0.7,"pith_summary":"The paper reports five previously unreported rhenium–osmium-based high/medium-entropy alloys — Re3.5Os3.5Ta0.5Hf0.5Nb3, Re3Os3Ta0.5Hf0.5Nb3, Re3.5Os3.5Mo0.5Hf0.5Nb3, Re3Os3Mo0.5Hf0.5Nb3, and Re3.5Os3.5Mo0.5W0.5Nb3 — and claims they are bulk type-II superconductors with $T_c$ from 4.20 K to 5.11 K, crystallizing single-phase in the noncentrosymmetric α-Mn structure. Three further claims give the work its point: the transition temperature rises with valence electron count (6.45–6.81), a Matthias-rule trend that suggests a design lever for further alloys; the structure and superconductivity survive a month of immersion in 0.5 mol/L HCl; and the large Kadowaki–Woods ratios imply strong electronic correlations. If the claims hold, these alloys enlarge the small family of noncentrosymmetric high-entropy-alloy superconductors and give experimentalists a composition-tunable platform for studying how inversion-symmetry breaking, spin–orbit coupling, and chemical disorder shape the superconducting state.","feed_headline":"Five new Re–Os alloys superconduct without inversion symmetry","feed_subtitle":"Disordered crystals that resist a month in acid, they hint that electron count tunes the transition temperature.","key_machinery":"Three elements carry the argument. The noncentrosymmetric α-Mn structure (space group $I\\bar{4}3m$) lacks an inversion center, which permits antisymmetric spin–orbit coupling and is why this family interests researchers hunting unconventional pairing. Valence electron count (VEC) is the design axis: compositions were chosen so VEC spans 6.45–6.81, and $T_c$ tracks it monotonically, following the Matthias-rule dome for transition-metal alloys. The Kadowaki–Woods ratio $A/\\gamma^2$, formed from the $T^2$ resistivity coefficient ($\\rho = \\rho_0 + AT^2$) and the specific-heat Sommerfeld coefficient $\\gamma$, is the diagnostic used to claim strong electron–electron correlations.","core_discovery":"Five previously unreported Re–Os-based alloys crystallize single-phase in the noncentrosymmetric α-Mn structure (space group $I\\bar{4}3m$) and are bulk type-II superconductors with $T_c$ = 4.20–5.11 K. Transport, magnetization, and specific-heat measurements agree: near-100% diamagnetic shielding, specific-heat jumps $\\Delta C/\\gamma T_c \\approx$ 1.38–1.48 close to the BCS value, moderate electron–phonon coupling ($\\lambda_{ep} \\approx$ 0.6), and upper critical fields up to 7.71 T, with Re3Os3Ta0.5Hf0.5Nb3 approaching the Pauli paramagnetic limit. The paper reports $T_c$ increasing with valence electron count, survival of structure and superconductivity after one month in HCl, and large Kado","pith_inferences":["The strong-correlation claim should be re-derived before it is quoted: the printed Kadowaki–Woods values (≈$10^{-4}$ μΩ cm mol² K² J⁻²) sit three to four orders of magnitude below the paper's own transition-metal benchmark (0.4), so as printed they contradict 'larger than transition metals'; computing $A/\\gamma^2$ with $\\gamma$ in J mol⁻¹ K⁻² rather than mJ changes the result by roughly a factor o","If the VEC–$T_c$ trend is real, a denser composition scan on the steep part of the Matthias dome (VEC ≈ 6.7–7.0) is the direct test; the present five points are consistent with the trend but do not resolve its shape.","Because other Re-based α-Mn-type superconductors (e.g., Re6Zr, Re8NbTa) break time-reversal symmetry, a muon-spin-rotation or polar-Kerr measurement on these alloys would test whether the noncentrosymmetric lattice here also produces an unconventional pairing channel — an experiment the authors explicitly leave open.","The one-month HCl stability is the most unusual functional result; whether it comes from noble-metal passivation of the Re/Os surface or from bulk corrosion resistance is untested, and a weight-loss or surface-spectroscopy study over longer exposures would separate the mechanisms."],"forward_implications":["Valence electron count becomes a tuning knob: across the five alloys, $T_c$ moves from 4.20 K to 5.11 K as VEC rises, so compositions on the rising side of the Matthias dome are the natural next targets.","The superconductivity is corrosion-resistant: after one month in 0.5 mol/L HCl the crystal structure, composition, and $T_c$ are essentially unchanged, a practical advantage for superconducting components in acidic environments.","The alloys carry a strong-correlation signature: their large Kadowaki–Woods ratios place them, on the paper's reading, among strongly correlated metals rather than ordinary transition-metal alloys.","The pairing is nonetheless conventional: $\\Delta C/\\gamma T_c \\approx$ 1.38–1.48 is BCS-like and no alloy exceeds the Pauli paramagnetic limit, with Re3Os3Ta0.5Hf0.5Nb3 approaching it most closely ($\\mu_0 H_{c2} \\approx$ 7.71 T vs $\\mu_0 H_P \\approx$ 7.81 T)."],"supporting_citations":[{"why":"Reports the first α-Mn-type high-entropy-alloy superconductors and their composition-dependent Tc; provides the VEC trend and comparison family this work extends.","marker":"[31]"},{"why":"Reports the closely related noncentrosymmetric α-Mn HEA Re0.35Os0.35Mo0.10W0.10Zr0.10, whose residual-resistance ratio, Pauli-limit behavior, and superconducting parameters serve as the main comparison.","marker":"[32]"},{"why":"Supplies the theoretical framework for the Kadowaki–Woods ratio used to infer strong electronic correlations.","marker":"[45]"},{"why":"Discovery of superconductivity in a high-entropy alloy; defines the material class the paper extends.","marker":"[10]"},{"why":"Demonstrates electron-count control of Tc in the Ta–Nb–Hf–Zr–Ti HEA superconductor, the VEC logic this paper applies.","marker":"[12]"},{"why":"Maps the binary Re1−xMox phases (hcp, α-Mn, β-CrFe, bcc) that motivate choosing the α-Mn Re–Os compositions.","marker":"[34]"},{"why":"Shows time-reversal symmetry breaking in the noncentrosymmetric superconductor Re6Zr, the unconventional-physics motivation for studying this family.","marker":"[26]"},{"why":"Reports time-reversal symmetry breaking across Re-based superconductors, framing the open question the authors flag for these alloys.","marker":"[29]"}],"fun_headline_variants":["New Re-Os alloys are noncentrosymmetric superconductors","Five Re-Os alloys superconduct without inversion symmetry","Electron count tunes Tc in new Re-Os superconductors","Re-Os alloys survive acid and keep superconducting","Correlated superconductivity found in Re-Os high-entropy alloys"],"cache_read_input_tokens":2816,"weakest_assumption_plain":"The strong-correlation conclusion rests entirely on the Kadowaki–Woods ratio $A/\\gamma^2$ being a faithful measure of electron–electron interactions in these alloys — even though $A$ is fitted over 10–50 K in samples with residual resistivity near 800 μΩ·cm and residual-resistance ratios near 1, where impurity and phonon scattering can mimic a large $A/\\gamma^2$, and even though the printed ratios do not match the quoted transition-metal benchmark.","fun_headline_variants_meta":{"raw":{"variants":["New Re-Os alloys are noncentrosymmetric superconductors","Five Re-Os alloys superconduct without inversion symmetry","Electron count tunes Tc in new Re-Os superconductors","Re-Os alloys survive acid and keep superconducting","Correlated superconductivity found in Re-Os high-entropy alloys"]},"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","effort":"low","cost_usd":0.000281,"raw_usage":{"total_tokens":1557,"prompt_tokens":858,"completion_tokens":699,"prompt_tokens_details":{"cached_tokens":256},"prompt_cache_hit_tokens":256,"prompt_cache_miss_tokens":602,"completion_tokens_details":{"reasoning_tokens":618}},"tokens_in":602,"tokens_out":699,"duration_ms":6660,"temperature":1.0,"reasoning_tokens":618,"cache_read_input_tokens":256,"cache_creation_input_tokens":0},"cache_creation_input_tokens":0},"created_at":"2026-08-05T23:36:21.261464+00:00","model_set":{"reader":"deepseek-v4-flash"},"falsifier":"In the correlations discussion around Figure 7b, recompute $A/\\gamma^2$ from the tabulated $A$ and $\\gamma$ using the benchmark convention ($a_{\\mathrm{TM}} = 0.4$ μΩ cm mol² K² J⁻², with $\\gamma$ in J mol⁻¹ K⁻²). The printed ratios (≈$10^{-4}$) are reproduced only if $\\gamma$ is left in mJ mol⁻¹ K⁻²; the unit-consistent values come out near $10^2$, orders of magnitude above the heavy-fermion benchmark of 10. Whichever arithmetic is right, one of the two numbers is wrong, and the 'strongly correlated' claim stands or falls with it. A complementary check: measure $A$ in a more ordered compositi","supporting_citations":[{"cited_title":"Stolze, F.A","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Reports the first α-Mn-type high-entropy-alloy superconductors and their composition-dependent Tc; provides the VEC trend and comparison family this work extends."},{"cited_title":"Koželj, S","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Discovery of superconductivity in a high-entropy alloy; defines the material class the paper extends."},{"cited_title":"V on Rohr, M.J","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Demonstrates electron-count control of Tc in the Ta–Nb–Hf–Zr–Ti HEA superconductor, the VEC logic this paper applies."},{"cited_title":"Shang, D.J","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Maps the binary Re1−xMox phases (hcp, α-Mn, β-CrFe, bcc) that motivate choosing the α-Mn Re–Os compositions."},{"cited_title":"Singh, A.D","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Shows time-reversal symmetry breaking in the noncentrosymmetric superconductor Re6Zr, the unconventional-physics motivation for studying this family."},{"cited_title":"Shang, M","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Reports time-reversal symmetry breaking across Re-based superconductors, framing the open question the authors flag for these alloys."}],"review_version":1}