Instability and decomposition on the surface of strained alloy films
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A continuum dynamical model is developed to determine the morphological and compositional instabilities on the free surface of heteroepitaxial alloy films in the absence of growth. We use a linear stability analysis to study the early nonequilibrium processes of surface evolution, and calculate the stability conditions and diagrams for different cases of material parameters. There are two key considerations in our treatment: the coupling between top free surface of the film and the bulk phase underneath, and the dependence of both Young's and shear elastic moduli on local composition. The combination and interplay of different elastic effects caused by lattice misfit between film and substrate (misfit strain), composition dependence of film lattice parameter (compositional strain), and of film elastic constants lead to complicated and rich stability results, in particular the joint stability or instability for morphological and compositional profiles, the asymmetry between tensile and compressive layers, as well as the possible stabilization and suppression of surface decomposition even below the effective critical temperature. We also compare our results with the observations of some postdeposition annealing experiments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".