MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977537291 · doi:10.1063/1.4792231

Monte Carlo study of electron-beam penetration and backscattering in multi-walled carbon nanotube materials: The effect of different scattering models

2013· article· en· W1977537291 on OpenAlexaff
Ioanna Kyriakou, Dimitris Emfietzoglou, Alireza Nojeh, M. Moscovitch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScatteringElastic scatteringInelastic scatteringMonte Carlo methodElectronElectron scatteringComputational physicsAtomic physicsMott scatteringCarbon nanotubeMaterials sciencePenetration depthPhysicsOpticsSmall-angle neutron scatteringNanotechnologyNuclear physicsNeutron scattering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A systematic study of electron-beam penetration and backscattering in multi-walled carbon nanotube (MWCNT) materials for beam energies of ∼0.3 to 30 keV is presented based on event-by-event Monte Carlo simulation of electron trajectories using state-of-the-art scattering cross sections. The importance of different analytic approximations for computing the elastic and inelastic electron-scattering cross sections for MWCNTs is emphasized. We offer a simple parameterization for the total and differential elastic-scattering Mott cross section, using appropriate modifications to the Browning formula and the Thomas-Fermi screening parameter. A discrete-energy-loss approach to inelastic scattering based on dielectric theory is adopted using different descriptions of the differential cross section. The sensitivity of electron penetration and backscattering parameters to the underlying scattering models is examined. Our simulations confirm the recent experimental backscattering data on MWCNT forests and, in particular, the steep increase of the backscattering yield at sub-keV energies as well as the sidewalls escape effect at high-beam energies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations17
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207