MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986133755 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.61.13969

Test of the Ardell distribution function for two-dimensional adsorbate islands using thermal desorption spectroscopy

2000· article· en· W1986133755 on OpenAlexafffund
Catherine Greenhalgh, Rachel Moll, Guy N. Pearson, A. J. Slavin

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B, Condensed matter · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicnanoparticles nucleation surface interactions
Canadian institutionsTrent University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaTrent University
KeywordsDesorptionRADIUSThermal desorptionWork (physics)Standard deviationDistribution functionThermalCurve fittingThermal desorption spectroscopyMaterials scienceDistribution (mathematics)Function (biology)ThermodynamicsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)PhysicsChemistryStatisticsMathematicsMathematical analysisAdsorptionPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The thermal desorption of atoms from two-dimensional deposit islands on a substrate may be limited by the rate of desorption from island edges. In earlier work, Slavin and Young developed a theory for the form of the desorption curves for such systems, as a function of the average island size, that agreed well with experimental data until just beyond the peak maximum. The fitting procedure provided values for the desorption energy, the average island radius, the standard deviation of the island-size distribution function, and the frequency of vibration of an atom at an island edge. The current study extends this work by incorporating a theoretical expression for the initial distribution of island sizes, due to Ardell, into the previous theory. The Ardell function provides a value for the average initial island radius and the standard deviation of the distribution without any curve fitting, if the surface coverage and the number of islands are known. It also enables the experimental thermal desorption data to be fitted over the entire desorption curve, which provides an independent check on the experimental value for surface coverage. The results using the Ardell distribution are in good agreement with all the parameters obtainable from the experimental data.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.680
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0080.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.265 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B, Condensed matterSame topicnanoparticles nucleation surface interactionsFrench-language works237,207