MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995121960 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2014-0313

Tight-binding approximation for bulk and edge electronic states in graphene

2014· article· en· W1995121960 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Oana-Ancuta Dobrescu, M. Apostoł

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphene research and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZigzagGraphenePhysicsCondensed matter physicsTight bindingTransfer matrixFermi levelEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionSemi-infiniteMonolayerMatrix (chemical analysis)Fermi energyQuantum mechanicsElectronic structureGeometryMaterials scienceNanotechnologyMathematical analysisMathematicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The tight-binding approximation is employed here to investigate electronic bulk and edge (“surface”) states in semi-infinite graphene sheets and graphene monolayer ribbons with various edge terminations (zigzag, horseshoe, and armchair edges). It is shown that edge states do not exist for a uniform hopping (transfer) matrix. The problem is generalized to include edge elements of the hopping matrix distinct from the infinite-sheet (“bulk”) ones. In this case, semi-infinite graphene sheets with zigzag or horseshoe edges exhibit edge states, while semi-infinite graphene sheets with armchair edges do not. The energy of the edge states lies above the (zero) Fermi level. Similarly, symmetric graphene ribbons with zigzag or horseshoe edges exhibit edge states, while ribbons with asymmetric edges (zigzag and horseshoe) do not. It is also shown how to construct the “reflected” solutions (bulk states) for the intervening equations with finite differences both for semi-infinite sheets and ribbons.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicGraphene research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207