MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019231418 · doi:10.1063/1.3142443

High spatial resolution confocal microscope with independent excitation and detection scanning capabilities

2009· article· en· W2019231418 on OpenAlexaff
S. Marcet, C. Ouellet-Plamondon, S. Francoeur

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNear-Field Optical Microscopy
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersSandia National Laboratories
KeywordsMicroscopeMaterials scienceOpticsCryostatConfocalImage resolutionCommon emitterResolution (logic)Optical microscopeNear-field scanning optical microscopeScanning Hall probe microscopeSpectroscopyDiffractionOptoelectronicsScanning electron microscopeConventional transmission electron microscopePhysicsComputer scienceScanning transmission electron microscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the design of a confocal microscope adapted for optical spectroscopy and imaging at cryogenic temperatures. This system is based on the existing approach of partly inserting the optical components of the microscope inside a helium-bath cryostat. It provides a spatial resolution approaching the diffraction limit with a mechanical stability allowing uninterrupted integration times exceeding 10 h and allows keeping track of a single emitter for unlimited periods of time. Furthermore, our design allows scanning the excitation spot and detection area independently of the sample position. This feature provides the means to perform probeless transport experiments on one-dimensional nanostructures. The scanning capabilities of this microscope are fully detailed and characterized using the photoluminescence of single nitrogen dyads at 4.5 K.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.228
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicNear-Field Optical MicroscopyFrench-language works237,207