Fabrication and Characterization of Graphitic Carbon Nanostructures with Controllable Size, Shape, and Position
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The incorporation of carbon materials in micro- and nanoscale devices is being widely investigated due to the promise of enhanced functionality. Challenges in the positioning and addressability of carbon nanotubes provide the motivation for the development of new processes to produce nanoscale carbon materials. Here, the fabrication of conducting, nanometer-sized carbon structures using a combination of electron beam lithography (EBL) and carbonisation is reported. EBL is used to directly write predefined nanometer-sized patterns in a thin layer of negative resist in controllable locations. Careful heat treatment results in carbon nanostructures with the size, shape, and location originally defined by EBL. The pyrolysis process results in significant shrinkage of the structures in the vertical direction and minimal loss in the horizontal direction. Characterization of the carbonized material indicates a structure consisting of both amorphous and graphitized carbon with low levels of oxygen. The resistivity of the material is similar to other disordered carbon materials and the resistivity is maintained from the bulk to the nanoscale. This is demonstrated by fabricating a nanoscale structure with predictable resistance. The ability to fabricate these conductive structures with known dimensions and in predefined locations can be exploited for a number of applications. Their use as nanoband electrodes is also demonstrated.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".