MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970182122 · doi:10.1002/pssa.200306470

Formation of porous layers on InSb(100) by anodization

2003· article· en· W1970182122 on OpenAlexaff
Patrik Schmuki, Lionel Santinacci, D. J. Lockwood, M. J. Graham

Bibliographic record

Venuephysica status solidi (a) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAnodic Oxide Films and Nanostructures
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Microstructural Sciences
FundersBundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
KeywordsAnodizingMaterials scienceAntimonyEtching (microfabrication)ChlorideElectrolytePorosityElectrochemistryHalogenPolarization (electrochemistry)Layer (electronics)DopingChemical engineeringBromideInorganic chemistryOptoelectronicsComposite materialMetallurgyChemistryElectrodeAluminiumPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present work deals with anodization processes of n-type InSb(100). Preferential etching of InSb can be electrochemically initiated in HCl HBr and HF solutions. Except for etch features also the formation of porous layers can be observed. The resulting features were characterized by SEM and AES measurements. Due to the narrow bandgap of the material the results of the anodization process are neither sensitive to illumination of the n-type material nor to the doping level. The morphology of the attack depends strongly on the electrochemical conditions and the type of halogen acid present in the electrolyte. In HCl and HBr a black porous layer can be formed that is likely to consist to a certain extent of an antimony-oxo-chloride or antimony-oxo-bromide. In HF, however, polarization under a wide range of electrochemical conditions leads to a uniform etching of the InSb surface.

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 score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations6
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuephysica status solidi (a)Same topicAnodic Oxide Films and NanostructuresFrench-language works237,207