MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nanoscale Dynamics at Reactive Wetting Front on SiC

2005· article· en· W2015544057 on OpenAlexaff
Shun Tanaka, Chihiro Iwamoto

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials science forum · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced ceramic materials synthesis
Canadian institutionsHatch (Canada)
FundersUniversity of Tokyo
KeywordsMaterials scienceAmorphous solidWettingAlloyComposite materialDissolutionTransmission electron microscopyNanoscopic scalePerpendicularLayer (electronics)NanotechnologyCrystallographyChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nanoscale singularity at the reactive wetting front on SiC (0006) was studied using video recorded in situ to clarify the dynamic atomistic behaviours of the brazing and the molten tip spreading on a high-temperature stage of a high-resolution transmission electron microscope. An atomistic process controls the wetting at the front of the spreading film where the classical macroscopic phenomenon never holds true and the singularities are observed in a precursor film. A 0.5-nm-thick precursor film spreading ahead of the main molten alloy on SiC (0006) at 1073 K and continuous spreading of the molten alloy were clearly observed on the SiC (0006) surface with a less than 1-nm-thick amorphous layer. Molten Ti and TiC nanolayers preceded the Ti5Si3 nanolayer at the tip and they traveled continuously at a velocity of 14 nm/sec on the plane perpendicular to SiC (0006). Since Ti atoms in the molten alloy diffuse sufficiently rapidly on the SiC surface to the tip, the formation of these layers may be the rate-determining step of spreading. Discontinuous spreading of the precursor tip on SiC (0006) with a thick amorphous film was observed in contrast to the continuous spreading on SiC with a thin film. This suggests that the spreading of the Ti molten alloy on SiC is also controlled by the dissolution of the amorphous layer.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient 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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.006

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.242
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; 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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials science forumSame topicAdvanced ceramic materials synthesisFrench-language works237,207