MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010520191 · doi:10.1063/1.4824469

Theoretical investigation of carrier capture and escape processes in cylindrical quantum dots

2013· article· en· W2010520191 on OpenAlexafffund
Jacek M. Miloszewski, Marek S. Wartak, Steven G. Wallace, S. Fafard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSemiconductor Quantum Structures and Devices
Canadian institutionsCyrium Technologies (Canada)Wilfrid Laurier University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsQuantum dotWave functionPhononCarrier lifetimePhysicsCondensed matter physicsQuantumAbsorption (acoustics)Atomic physicsQuantum mechanicsOptoelectronicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to optimize the design of various optoelectronic devices utilizing quantum dots (QD), we must better understand the properties of carrier capture and escape times in these systems. Some of the properties of cylindrical quantum dots were studied. The wavefunctions and eigenenergies of a cylindrical quantum dot were approximated by a product of solutions of an infinite cylinder and a quantum well. It was assumed that the majority of transitions are caused by absorption/emission of polar optical phonons, and Fermi's golden rule was applied to calculate the transition rates to and from the QD. We have restricted our calculations to one-phonon (first order) processes only. We determined the carrier capture and escape times as a function of the size of the QD and carrier density. We have shown that the smallest capture times are achieved if the QD has only one quantum level. A short capture time is also achieved for a low carrier density. Similarly, the capture time has the smallest value when the QD has only one quantum level. The dependence of the carrier escape time for a fixed dot dimension shows a minimum as a function of carrier density. For small QDs, the capture and escape times are approximately independent of carrier density.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.369

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicSemiconductor Quantum Structures and DevicesFrench-language works237,207