MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979902251 · doi:10.1063/1.4870200

XANES study of Fe-implanted strontium titanate

2014· article· en· W1979902251 on OpenAlexafffund
Olga Lobacheva, Lyudmila V. Goncharova, M. Chavarha, T. K. Sham

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectronic and Structural Properties of Oxides
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersArgonne National LaboratoryDalhousie University
KeywordsXANESMaterials scienceIon implantationStrontium titanateAnnealing (glass)Analytical Chemistry (journal)DopingSquidMagnetic momentFerromagnetismIon beamNuclear magnetic resonanceIonSpectroscopyCondensed matter physicsOptoelectronicsNanotechnologyThin filmMetallurgyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Properties of strontium titanate SrTiO3 (STO) depend to a great extent on the substitutional dopants and defects of crystal structure. The ion beam implantation method was used for doping STO (001) crystals with Fe at different doses. Implanted samples were then annealed at 350°C in oxygen to induce recrystallization and remove oxygen vacancies produced during ion implantation process. The effect of Fe doping and post-implantation annealing was studied by X-ray Absorption Near Edge Spectroscopy (XANES) method and Superconducting Quantum Interference Device (SQUID). XANES allowed to monitor the change in structure of STO crystals and in the local environment of Fe following the implantation and annealing steps. SQUID measurements revealed correlation between magnetic moment and Fe implantation dose. Ferromagnetic hysteresis was observed on selected Fe-implanted STO at 5 K. The observed magnetic properties can be correlated with the several Fe oxide phases in addition to the presence of O/Ti vacancies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicElectronic and Structural Properties of OxidesFrench-language works237,207