MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016586423 · doi:10.1063/1.1565498

Carrier-density-wave transport property depth profilometry using spectroscopic photothermal radiometry of silicon wafers I: Theoretical aspects

2003· article· en· W2016586423 on OpenAlexafffund
Derrick Shaughnessy, Andreas Mandelis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermography and Photoacoustic Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceExcitationWaferWavelengthPhotothermal spectroscopyOpticsThermal diffusivityPhotothermal therapySemiconductorLaserSIGNAL (programming language)OptoelectronicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A theoretical model for the photothermal radiometric (PTR) signal from an indirect band-gap semiconductor excited by a laser of arbitrary wavelength is presented. The model has been used to investigate the spectral dependence of the sensitivity of the PTR signal to variations in the electronic transport parameters of the sample. Simulations show slight variations of the sensitivity to carrier lifetime and carrier diffusivity with excitation wavelength due to changes in the strength of the thermal contribution to the signal that are a result of changes in the difference between the photon energy and the band gap. The sensitivity of the PTR signal to changes in the front surface recombination velocity is shown to have a strong dependence on the excitation wavelength with the sensitivity decreasing as the absorption depth of the excitation source increases, allowing spectroscopic carrier-density-wave depth profilometric measurements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations25
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicThermography and Photoacoustic TechniquesFrench-language works237,207