MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967569244 · doi:10.1088/0953-8984/18/12/004

Plasmons in isolated single-walled carbon nanotubes

2006· article· en· W1967569244 on OpenAlexafffund
Ricardo Pérez, William Que

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Condensed Matter · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon Nanotubes in Composites
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPlasmonCarbon nanotubeZigzagTight bindingMaterials scienceRaman scatteringCondensed matter physicsExcitationRaman spectroscopyDispersion (optics)Molecular physicsElectronChirality (physics)PhysicsNanotechnologyElectronic structureOpticsQuantum mechanicsOptoelectronicsSymmetry breaking

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The collective excitation modes of individual single-walled carbon nanotubes are studied theoretically in the nearest-neighbour tight-binding approximation. Umklapp terms are taken into account and local-field effects are studied. Plasmon mode dispersion relations for carbon nanotubes with radius R ∼7 Å are obtained. We report a strong dependence of the plasmon dispersion on the chirality of the carbon nanotubes. In particular, armchair and zigzag tubes have dispersive plasmons, but some of the chiral tubes have essentially dispersionless plasmons. Our results offer an alternative explanation to the origin of the experimentally observed low-energy dispersionless modes found in momentum-dependent EELS experiments. Important differences between a tight-binding model and free electron gas model are discussed and it is shown that some important qualitative features cannot be captured by a free electron gas model. An acoustic plasmon mode is found in all metallic carbon nanotubes, giving support to the experimental findings in Raman scattering.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations19
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Condensed MatterSame topicCarbon Nanotubes in CompositesFrench-language works237,207