MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009531331 · doi:10.1002/crat.201000269

Crystal growth by the travelling heater method using tapered crucibles and applied rotating magnetic field

2010· article· en· W2009531331 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCrystal Research and Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSolidification and crystal growth phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmpouleRotating magnetic fieldCrystal growthMagnetic fieldCrystal (programming language)Materials scienceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryComposite materialCrystallographyChromatographyPhysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Crystal growth experiments were carried out by the Travelling Heater Method using tapered growth ampoules with and without the application of a rotating magnetic field. The objective was to enhance its commercial potential by reducing the size of required seed crystals and increasing the growth rate. To this end, a number of GaSb crystals were grown using either 25 mm diameter straight, or 10 mm to 25 mm tapered growth ampoules. Growth rates of 2 mm/day and 5 mm/day were employed. The effect of rotating magnetic fields of several strengths and frequencies was examined. (© 2010 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.293 · 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