MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1561464018 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.0704.1680

Carbon Nanotube Thin Film Field Emitting Diode: Understanding the System Response Based on Multiphysics Modeling

2007· preprint· en· W1561464018 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Niraj Sinha, D. Roy Mahapatra, John T. W. Yeow, Roderick Melnik, David A. Jaffray

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2007
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon Nanotubes in Composites
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMultiphysicsCarbon nanotubeMaterials scienceNucleationField electron emissionThin filmAnodeDiodeNanotubeSubstrate (aquarium)NanotechnologyOptoelectronicsFinite element methodPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we model the evolution and self-assembly of randomly oriented carbon nanotubes (CNTs), grown on a metallic substrate in the form of a thin film for field emission under diode configuration. Despite high output, the current in such a thin film device often decays drastically. The present paper is focused on understanding this problem. A systematic, multiphysics based modelling approach is proposed. First, a nucleation coupled model for degradation of the CNT thin film is derived, where the CNTs are assumed to decay by fragmentation and formation of clusters. The random orientation of the CNTs and the electromechanical interaction are then modeled to explain the self-assembly. The degraded state of the CNTs and the electromechanical force are employed to update the orientation of the CNTs. Field emission current at the device scale is finally obtained by using the Fowler-Nordheim equation and integration over the computational cell surfaces on the anode side. The simulated results are in close agreement with the experimental results. Based on the developed model, numerical simulations aimed at understanding the effects of various geometric parameters and their statistical features on the device current history are reported.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.088
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.124 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicCarbon Nanotubes in CompositesFrench-language works237,207