Pierre Curie

Record year1880—1881

summaryPierre and Jacques Curie jointly demonstrated in hemihedral crystals that pressure produces polar charges and release reverses their sign, and experimentally showed the reciprocal electromechanical effect in which applied electricity produces contraction or extension. Their quartz piezoelectric apparatus also constituted an early standard of constant electrostatic charge.

M rationaleThe direct and inverse effects and the early electrostatic standard have been experimentally verified, and cross-generational materials show that their electromechanical conversion mechanism entered chains of transduction, quartz oscillation, and frequency standards, becoming an enduring foundational physical mechanism.

attribution rationaleAttribution to this person: Pierre Curie (40.00%): Pierre jointly completed the 1880 direct-effect and 1881 reciprocal-effect experiments and participated in connecting the piezoelectric response into a usable quartz standard; the share evaluates these direct experimental and delivery actions. Complete attribution budget: Pierre Curie (40.00%): Pierre jointly completed the 1880 direct-effect and 1881 reciprocal-effect experiments and participated in connecting the piezoelectric response into a usable quartz standard; the share evaluates these direct experimental and delivery actions. Jacques Curie (40.00%): both original works and the quartz apparatus are explicitly joint results of Jacques and Pierre; current materials do not support reducing the coauthor to an assistant. Gabriel Lippmann (8.00%): Lippmann previously predicted and argued from conservation principles for specific properties of the reciprocal phenomenon, providing explicit theoretical prior work for the 1881 experimental outcome; he does not claim the joint experiment on the 1880 direct effect. Public publication of original research (3.00%): publication of the original papers made the effects publicly reproducible knowledge; scientific discovery itself is not claimed by virtue of journal identity. Unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (9.00%): the remaining budget is retained for crystal preparation, instrument making, experimental assistance, and apparatus-implementation actions of 1886/1889 that have not yet been clarified, avoiding default assignment to the two named authors.

overlap boundaryThe quartz piezoelectric standard is included in the same effect chain; subsequent devices, standard systems, and radioactivity measurements are separate.

Evidence gapsThe original 1880 and 1881 journal fascicles, Lippmann's original paper, and the division of labor for the 1886/1889 apparatus still require examination.

Record year1897—1898

summaryMarie Curie's quantitative activity measurements advanced observations of anomalous minerals into a method for searching for new elements through successive separations and remeasurement of activity. She and Pierre Curie publicly identified polonium and radium with reservations on the basis of chemical behavior, activity enrichment, and spectroscopic evidence.

M rationaleActivity-guided separation and remeasurement formed a generally applicable method for searching for new elements and delivered qualified identifications of polonium and radium; this assessment concerns the discovery entry point and the method's scope.

attribution rationaleAttribution to this person: Pierre Curie (25.00%): Pierre modified apparatus for measuring weak currents, joined the search after the anomalous-mineral result, and participated in physical measurement, separation procedures, and two joint reports. Complete attribution budget: Marie Curie (35.00%): Marie selected the research question, completed preliminary quantitative measurement, atomic-property and anomalous-mineral judgments, proposed the search hypothesis, and jointly advanced activity-guided separation and the two reports; after C02 is merged, these actions are claimed here only once. Pierre Curie (25.00%): Pierre modified apparatus for measuring weak currents, joined the search after the anomalous-mineral result, and participated in physical measurement, separation procedures, and two joint reports. Gustave Bémont (12.00%): Bémont supplied chemical operations, advice, and assistance, and coauthored the radium report; this is not generic support that can be absorbed by the label “assistant.” Henri Becquerel (8.00%): Becquerel had previously discovered uranium radiation and air ionization and submitted the two reports; prior work and public linkage do not mean jointly completing the new-element search. Eugène Demarçay (5.00%): Demarçay conducted key spectroscopic tests: the polonium candidate lacked a distinctive line, while the radium candidate showed an unknown line increasing with activity, providing positive and negative verification for the qualified identification. Unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (8.00%): restores the remaining budget for complete instrument, specimen, chemical, and material support in the existing shared ledger; it does not transfer Schmidt's credit to the Curies or to unknown persons. Public publication of original research (3.00%): contemporary laboratory work, Academy submissions, and journal publication made the joint experiments public knowledge; it does not claim the scientific inference itself. Unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (4.00%): retains responsibility for experimental division of labor, material handling, and other direct assistance not given in the original reports, avoiding forced consolidation from the author list.

overlap boundaryThe two 1898 reports on polonium and radium are treated as the same research procedure; later pure radium, decay theory, and nuclear technology are excluded.

Evidence gapsThe original French reports of 1898, the chemical division of labor, and the history of independent adoption still require further checking.

Record year1894

summaryPierre Curie proposed the characteristic symmetry of physical phenomena, the maximum symmetry permitted for a phenomenon, and the necessary role of asymmetry in a phenomenon's occurrence, while noting that the converse of causal symmetry propositions generally does not hold.

M rationaleThis proposition remains an operational method of discrimination in specialist teaching of international crystallography, used to derive symmetry changes and optical consequences when crystals are subject to external fields.

attribution rationaleAttribution to this person: Pierre Curie (70.00%): Pierre developed the propositions, qualifications, group relations, and examples in the 1894 article, transforming existing classificatory tools into an explicit physical framework for discrimination. Complete attribution budget: Pierre Curie (70.00%): Pierre developed the propositions, qualifications, group relations, and examples in the 1894 article, transforming existing classificatory tools into an explicit physical framework for discrimination. Auguste Bravais (8.00%): the Bravais crystallography and symmetry-classification work cited in the article provides direct conceptual prior work; Pierre's physical propositions are not thereby returned to the precursor. Camille Jordan (6.00%): Jordan's work on groups and classification is formal prior work explicitly taken up by the article; the share is limited to tools entering this theoretical expression. Public publication of original research (3.00%): journal publication in 1894 made the theoretical propositions publicly discussable knowledge; it does not claim their content. Unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (13.00%): retains a budget for crystal classification, group-theory input, editing, and discussion responsibilities not yet fully verified, avoiding exhausting the prior work solely from two citations.

overlap boundaryThe theoretical framework for discrimination is separate from the piezoelectric experimental chain; general group theory and later applications are not combined.

Evidence gapsInstitutional holdings or scans of the original journal, the complete examples, and the roster of prior work still require further checking.

Record year1895

summaryPierre Curie systematically studied how magnetism varies with temperature and magnetic field, proposed an approximate inverse relationship applicable to bounded materials and temperature ranges, and observed a ferromagnetic transition. Its later extension is still used to explain magnetic susceptibility.

M rationaleThe original measurements established a testable law and domain of applicability for classification across substances; later material characterization still uses its extension, showing continuing professional-method value.

attribution rationaleCredit for the focal person: Pierre Curie (70.00%): original 1895 systematic measurements and inductive conclusions; the 1903 collaborative apparatus is no longer included. Full attribution budget: Pierre Curie (70.00%): original 1895 systematic measurements and inductive conclusions; the 1903 collaborative apparatus is no longer included; Michael Faraday (5.00%): Faraday's prior work on magnetic questions and experiments; John Hopkinson (7.00%): the nearer prior work on temperature measurements discussed in the original text; unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (6.00%): equipment and facilities inputs acknowledged in the original text, whose specific names and roles are not fully checked; unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (12.00%): residual account for samples, manufacture, and measurement assistance.

overlap boundaryThe 1895 scientific law and the 1903 measuring apparatus are treated separately; Weiss's later extension is not included.

Evidence gapsThe full responsibility for all data tables in the original paper and for facilities, samples, and measurement assistance has not yet been checked page by page.

Record year1902—1910

summaryThe Curie team established radium's chemical identity through pure radium salts, successive atomic-weight measurements, and periodic placement; in 1910 Marie Curie and Debierne obtained metallic radium and tested that its radioactivity was independent of its compound state.

M rationalePurification, atomic-weight confirmation, periodic placement, and metallic-state verification form an internationally important chain of chemical identity and experimental material, supporting foundational capabilities for radioactivity research.

attribution rationaleAttribution to this person: Pierre Curie (8.00%): early maturation of pure salts was closely connected to the couple's joint research, and the 1905 lecture states that “we” obtained pure salts; the share does not extend to posthumous precision measurement in 1907 or metallic preparation in 1910. Complete attribution budget: Marie Curie (52.00%): Marie particularly undertook prolonged fractional crystallization, preparation of pure salts, atomic-weight measurement, and chemical-identity argument, and jointly completed the work on metallic radium; these were the principal direct actions in the maturation chain. Pierre Curie (8.00%): early maturation of pure salts was closely connected to the couple's joint research, and the 1905 lecture states that “we” obtained pure salts; the share does not extend to posthumous precision measurement in 1907 or metallic preparation in 1910. André-Louis Debierne (18.00%): Debierne and Marie jointly completed preparation of metallic radium in 1910; this share claims only metallic-state verification within the maturation chain, not all work on pure salts and atomic weights. Eugène Demarçay (5.00%): Demarçay's radium spectral lines and their strengthening with enrichment provided continuing verification for purification progress and elemental identity. Unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (10.00%): tonne-scale residue processing, factory pretreatment, material transport, and prolonged laboratory implementation lack a complete roster, so responsibility not absorbable by named authors is retained. Public publication of original research (3.00%): contemporary public delivery of multistage outcomes bears limited institutional responsibility and does not claim the chemical work. Unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (4.00%): retains a remaining budget for gaps in reagent, instrument, operational, and analytical responsibility caused by unread original papers.

overlap boundaryPure salts, atomic weight, and metallic state are treated as one maturation chain; early element identification is not duplicated.

Evidence gapsThe original papers of 1902, 1907, and 1910 and the specific division of labor in metallic preparation still require article-by-article examination.

Record year1903

summaryPierre Curie and Albert Laborde jointly measured that radium continuously released significant heat. Later remeasurements support the persistence of this result, but are not part of the original experiment of 1903 itself.

M rationaleThe reproducible calorimetric fact connected radioactivity with sustained energy release far beyond the scale of ordinary chemical reactions, with important significance for early radiation physics and understanding of atomic energy.

attribution rationaleAttribution to this person: Pierre Curie (38.00%): Pierre explicitly reported the sustained heat release and its magnitude as a coauthor and treated it as an experimental fact in the question of radioactive energy; the share excludes later theory. Complete attribution budget: Pierre Curie (38.00%): Pierre explicitly reported the sustained heat release and its magnitude as a coauthor and treated it as an experimental fact in the question of radioactive energy; the share excludes later theory. Albert Laborde (38.00%): the lecture explicitly says “in collaboration with Laborde”; existing material does not support reducing Laborde to an assistant, and the central ledger and Pierre use symmetric estimates of direct experimental responsibility. Public publication of original research (4.00%): contemporary public delivery of the original calorimetric result bears limited institutional responsibility. Unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (20.00%): the original paper has not been read; the calorimetric apparatus, radium sample, calibration, and experimental assistance have not been assigned to a complete roster, so the remaining budget is retained.

overlap boundaryOnly the calorimetric result of 1903 is counted; independent remeasurements, decay theory, and later energy or medical uses are not combined.

Evidence gapsThe original calorimetry paper, calibration method, observation duration, and experimental division of labor still require examination.

Record yearAround 1900 (original paper awaiting verification)

summaryThe Curies identified that solids temporarily acquire radioactivity in an environment of active air and lose it according to characteristic laws. This outcome records the phenomenon and description of temporary deposition and decay.

M rationaleThis result revealed a new phenomenon that can be reproducibly manipulated and measured, constituting important experimental knowledge in radiation physics and chemistry.

attribution rationaleAttribution to this person: Pierre Curie (30.00%): together with Marie, he discovered that solids are temporarily radioactive in active air and described their decay; he does not claim Rutherford's emanation hypothesis or decay theory. Complete attribution budget: Marie Curie (30.00%): the 1905 lecture explicitly attributes the discovery of induced radioactivity to the joint work of Marie and Pierre; current material does not support further division of the internal experimental actions beyond the marital relationship. Pierre Curie (30.00%): together with Marie, he discovered that solids are temporarily radioactive in active air and described their decay; he does not claim Rutherford's emanation hypothesis or decay theory. Public publication of original research (4.00%): contemporary public delivery bears limited institutional responsibility. Unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (36.00%): before the original papers and time chain are checked, Rutherford is not pre-characterized; the released share returns to the pool of unresolved direct actions and is not transferred to the Curies.

overlap boundaryOnly the induced phenomenon is counted; atomic decay theory, later materials research, and medical uses are not included.

Evidence gapsThe original papers, division of labor, and the temporal and causal relation to Rutherford's emanation research remain unresolved.

Record yearAround 1900 (original paper awaiting verification)

summaryThe Curies verified through electrical and field-deflection-related experiments that beta rays from radioactive substances carry negative charge, limiting the conclusion to the experimental range then comparable with electrons and cathode rays.

M rationaleThis is a specialized experimental judgment that continues to hold in radiation physics and established the negative electrical nature of beta radiation.

attribution rationaleAttribution to this person: Pierre Curie (28.00%): completed the negative-charge verification jointly with Marie; the share is limited to this experimental judgment and does not claim all radiation classification. Complete budget: Marie Curie (28.00%): a 1905 lecture explicitly says that Marie and Pierre jointly verified that beta rays carry negative charge; as the specific internal actions are not separately clear, a symmetrical estimate of central responsibility is used; Pierre Curie (28.00%): completed the negative-charge verification jointly with Marie, with the share limited to this experimental judgment and not all radiation classification; Ernest Rutherford (8.00%): Rutherford's classification of alpha/beta rays and research on their field behavior provide explicit background for this item, not joint completion of the Curies' negative-charge verification; Henri Becquerel (4.00%): Becquerel's discovery of uranium radiation and subsequent ray research form prior work and receive only the limited input connected to this experimental question; Joseph John Thomson (4.00%): the electron/cathode-ray framework is explicit theoretical and experimental prior work for explaining beta rays' negative charge and does not receive credit for radioactive-ray verification; publication of the original research (4.00%): limited institutional responsibility for public delivery of the original experiment, and journal identity does not replace experimental contribution; unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (24.00%): the original paper and division of work have not been read, retaining unassigned direct inputs from apparatus, experimental assistance, and contemporary ray research rather than filling the budget with names from a review.

overlap boundaryCounts only the joint verification of beta rays and keeps it separate from secondary X-ray experiments and the discovery of the electron.

Evidence gapsThe original paper, apparatus, quantitative conclusion, and relation to contemporary work have not yet been directly read and checked.

Record year1903

summaryPierre Curie and C. Chéneveau jointly delivered an apparatus for measuring magnetic constants, together with its calibration, correction for air magnetism, and absolute-measurement procedure, and demonstrated its use for radium-salt measurement in a paper.

M rationaleThe apparatus has a complete measurement procedure, calibration corrections, and material application, making it a reusable specialist experimental tool.

attribution rationaleAttribution to this person: Pierre Curie (40.00%): jointly authored design and measurement procedure; sole leadership is not presumed. Complete attribution budget: Pierre Curie (40.00%): jointly authored design and measurement procedure; sole leadership is not presumed. C. Chéneveau (joint experimental author) (40.00%): estimate of equal direct responsibility as a joint author. Unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (17.00%): apparatus manufacture, standard materials, and experimental support; the complete division of labor has not been checked. Public publication of original research (3.00%): public delivery of the method and apparatus.

overlap boundaryThe instrument delivery is separate from the 1895 laws of magnetism; the 1906 modification is not counted as a separate outcome.

Evidence gapsThe full text on the separate precision balance, records of apparatus dissemination and adoption, and the two people's division of labor still require further checking.

Record year1901—1902

summaryPierre Curie and Georges Sagnac demonstrated through experiments with low pressure, metal substitution, and potential compensation that part of the secondary radiation produced when heavy metals are irradiated by X-rays carries negative charge.

M rationaleControls of pressure, metal, and potential compensation constitute a reproducible experimental discrimination and measurement method, providing a bounded increment of specialist knowledge.

attribution rationaleAttribution to this person: Pierre Curie (34.00%): Pierre jointly proposed and carried out the negative-charge test, which used his quadrant electrometer; this share does not extend to the discovery of secondary radiation or to the entire prior work of instrumentation. Full attribution budget: Pierre Curie (34.00%): Pierre jointly proposed and carried out the negative-charge test, which used his quadrant electrometer; this share does not extend to the discovery of secondary radiation or to the entire prior work of instrumentation; Georges Sagnac (48.00%): the paper explicitly bears joint authorship with Sagnac, and the study directly connects to his earlier work on secondary radiation; the higher share evaluates the joint experiment and continuity of the problem, without assigning him a second share for prior work; public publication of the original research (3.00%): limited responsibility for public delivery through the 1901 conference publication and the 1902 journal publication; unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (12.00%): as-yet unnamed instrumentation, sample, and implementation inputs; the remaining account for this item is not further explained by an unread latter half of the page; Jacques Curie (3.00%): the original text explicitly uses J. Curie's quartz piezoelectric compensation method for current measurement. He is allocated only the specific measurement prerequisite, not credit as a coauthor of this radiation experiment.

overlap boundaryThe 1901 and 1902 records are treated as the same outcome; they are separate from radium beta rays and later detectors.

Evidence gapsThe 1900 short report, page-by-page collation of the original publication, internal division of experimental labor, and the scope of subsequent adoption have not yet been closed.

Record year1910

summaryOn the basis of her recent Sorbonne course on radioactivity, Marie Curie published as sole author the two-volume Treatise on Radioactivity, systematically organizing ions and electrons, experiment and measurement, radioactive substances, emanation, induced radioactivity, transmutation theory, and radiation properties.

M rationaleThe two-volume work was actually published and explicitly derived from a course already taught, producing a sustainably reusable systematic text beyond a one-time lecture or unimplemented teaching intent.

attribution rationaleAttribution to this person: Pierre Curie (5.00%): Pierre died in 1906 and receives no direct share for the 1910 course or writing; only his joint early research synthesized in the work is retained as limited knowledge prior work. Complete budget: Marie Curie (52.00%): the title page and introduction explicitly identify Marie as author and say the work arose from her Sorbonne course; the share is limited to course organization, synthesis, and book production; Pierre Curie (5.00%): Pierre died in 1906 and receives no direct share for the 1910 course or writing, retaining only his joint early research synthesized in the work as limited knowledge prior work; Ernest Rutherford (6.00%): content such as transmutation theory has explicit Rutherford knowledge prior work, and this share does not recast his theory as an original result of Marie's book; unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (17.00%): the two volumes synthesize broad physics and chemistry research, and as a chapter-by-chapter source map is not complete, other researchers' knowledge inputs are retained; Sorbonne course organization and delivery (8.00%): the Sorbonne course provided an actually occurring teaching setting and organizational vehicle, without substituting the school's prestige for authorial labor; Gauthier-Villars publishing house (8.00%): the publisher undertook editing, printing, and public delivery of the two-volume text; unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (4.00%): specific editors, proofreaders, illustrators, and printers are unnamed, retaining a limited residual account.

overlap boundaryCounts only course-based organization and book delivery; the original research restated in the book, other researchers' theories, and Pierre's early teaching are not combined.

Evidence gapsCourse dates, student range, sales, editions, translations, reviews, adoption history, and a chapter-by-chapter attribution map are still absent.