Formation of Ni-graphite intercalation compounds on SiC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report the observation, by scanning tunneling microscopy (STM), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), Auger electron spectroscopy (AES), and atomic force microscopy (AFM), of a graphite intercalation compound (GIC) formed by a new mechanism. Ni films with a nominal thickness of 2.5 monolayers were sputter deposited onto single-crystal 6H-SiC (0001) substrates heated to 600 \ifmmode^\circ\else\textdegree\fi{}C in an ultrahigh-vacuum STM system. When the substrates are annealed to 800--1000 \ifmmode^\circ\else\textdegree\fi{}C, the formation of islands is observed by STM. The islands were \ensuremath{\sim}0.3 \ensuremath{\mu}m in diameter, \ensuremath{\sim}30 nm high, and separated by 5 \ensuremath{\mu}m from each other, with an exceptionally flat top with a peculiar ``stitched'' surface structure. A second type of island, \ensuremath{\sim}1.5 \ensuremath{\mu}m in diameter, \ensuremath{\sim}10 nm high, and separated by \ensuremath{\sim}10 \ensuremath{\mu}m from each other, was observed by AFM and SEM. Microspot AES showed that the first islands are composed of Ni and C, while the second islands are composed of Ni, C, and Si. AES line shape studies showed that the C in both types of islands is graphitically bound. AES line shape analysis of the carbon in the substrate (SiC) verified carbidic binding. From comparisons to the literature, we believe that the first islands are a new type of GIC. An indexing of Ni on the top graphite sheets is presented for each anneal temperature.
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".