MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1946777425 · doi:10.1149/1.2742300

Oxidation of LiF–Coated Metal Surfaces

2007· article· en· W1946777425 on OpenAlexafffund
Ayse Turak, Chih-Ying Huang, D. Grozea, Zheng Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSemiconductor materials and devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsPassivationX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyMetalMaterials scienceCorrosionCoatingChemical engineeringDiffusionLayer (electronics)Thin filmCathodeNanotechnologyChemistryMetallurgyPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy was used to study the growth of oxides on the surface of Al and Mg films with and without a thin LiF coating under ambient conditions. At thicknesses typically used in optoelectronic device cathodes, LiF does not completely cover the surface, likely forming islands on the metal surface. On Al, 10 Å LiF (61% coverage) is sufficient to significantly decrease oxidation. The passivation of Al surfaces is enhanced due to a diffusion dominated oxidation mechanism, with metal ions diffusing through the LiF islands. LiF coated Mg, on the other hand, shows preferential oxidation to form MgCO 3 on the surface. These changes in the oxidation of the surface due to the introduction of a LiF layer can be used to explain the recent results for organic light-emitting devices. Bulk lattice constants can be used as a guide to predicting oxidation resistance, with matching interlayers providing better resistance in devices than nonmatching ones.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations10
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Electrochemical SocietySame topicSemiconductor materials and devicesFrench-language works237,207