MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984833445 · doi:10.1063/1.1641176

The Urbach focus and hydrogenated amorphous silicon

2004· article· en· W1984833445 on OpenAlexaff
Farida Orapunt, Stephen K. O’Leary

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Letters · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThin-Film Transistor Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmorphous siliconSiliconFocus (optics)Amorphous solidMaterials scienceNanocrystalline siliconAmorphous semiconductorsAbsorption (acoustics)Crystalline siliconOptoelectronicsOpticsChemistryCrystallographyPhysicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We critically examine the validity of the Urbach “focus” concept for the case of hydrogenated amorphous silicon. Our approach involves an analysis of a broad assortment of hydrogenated amorphous silicon experimental optical absorption data from many different sources. We find that these experimental data are consistent with the notion of the Urbach focus concept. The implications of this conclusion are explored.

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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.159 · 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

Citations33
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics LettersSame topicThin-Film Transistor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207