Carbon nanotubes overgrown and ingrown with nanocrystalline diamond deposited by different CVD plasma systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work we investigate the growth of diamond film on a porous single‐wall carbon nanotubes (SWNT) paper by employing three different Chemical Vapour Deposition (CVD) systems: plasma‐assisted hot filament, focused microwave plasma and linear antenna microwave plasma. We observe that the diamond growth is strongly affected by the different conditions in each of the CVD processes resulting in different SWNT/diamond composite structures. It is also found that only the linear antenna microwave plasma CVD process allows penetration of the activated growth species into the volume of the SWNT paper, whereas using the other methods, the diamond grains are formed on the SWNT paper surface only. Moreover, the growth of diamond structures within the substrate volume is strongly influenced by the CH4/CO2/H2 gas content ratio. A key factor influencing the formation of a compact SWNT/diamond composite is keeping the equilibrium between two competitive processes: establishing conditions where the diamond structure can grow while etching/damage of the SWNT paper is still kept at a minimum. The morphology and chemical composition of formed composite materials were characterized by scanning electron microscopy and Raman spectroscopy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".