MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016514284 · doi:10.1063/1.1314902

Effect of deposition temperature on the optical transmission and paramagnetic centers in pulsed laser deposited amorphous silicon carbide thin films

2000· article· en· W2016514284 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Tabbal, S. Isber, T. Christidis, My Alı El Khakani, Mohamed Chaker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicDiamond and Carbon-based Materials Research
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersUniversity Research Board, American University of BeirutNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsElectron paramagnetic resonanceMaterials scienceParamagnetismPulsed laser depositionAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Amorphous solidPulsed EPRThin filmSiliconNuclear magnetic resonanceChemistryCondensed matter physicsOptoelectronicsCrystallographyNanotechnologySpin echo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The optical transmission and paramagnetic centers in pulsed laser deposited amorphous silicon carbide films were investigated as a function of the deposition temperature (Td). As Td is raised from 200 to 650 °C, the optical gap of the films increases from about 2.0 eV up to a value of 2.2 eV, while the density of paramagnetic defects, measured by electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR), diminishes from (5.6 to 3.6)×1020 spins/cm3. EPR line shape analyses and g-value measurements indicate that the EPR active centers are clustered sp2 carbon related defects. At a measurement temperature of −190 °C, the exchange narrowed EPR linewidth, evaluated at 5.0±0.3 G, is nearly independent of Td. However, at room temperature, the EPR linewidth was found to increase with deposition temperature, thus suggesting a decrease in the size of the sp2 bonded clusters. All the structural changes revealed by EPR, as Td was raised from 200 to 650 °C, correlate well with the optical transmission data and with the increase in heteronuclear SiC bonding revealed by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. Finally, analysis of the thermal dependence of the EPR linewidth together with the conductivity of the a-SiC films have revealed the existence of different conduction mechanisms in the layers, depending on the deposition temperature.

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)0.001
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicDiamond and Carbon-based Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207