MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022167272 · doi:10.1063/1.1485124

Comparison of strain relaxation in InGaAsN and InGaAs thin films

2002· article· en· W2022167272 on OpenAlex
M. Adamcyk, Jens H. Schmid, T. Tiedje, Alexey Koveshnikov, A. Chahboun, V. Fink, K. L. Kavanagh

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Letters · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGaN-based semiconductor devices and materials
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceMolecular beam epitaxyEpitaxyTransmission electron microscopyThin filmRelaxation (psychology)Stress relaxationSubstrate (aquarium)Strain (injury)NitrideDiffractionNitrogenCrystallographyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)OpticsComposite materialChemistryNanotechnologyLayer (electronics)Creep

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We compare the strain relaxation of In0.08Ga0.92As and In0.12Ga0.88As0.99N0.01 epitaxial thin films grown on GaAs (001) by elemental-source molecular-beam epitaxy. The epilayers we studied were essentially identical in their compressive lattice mismatch (0.62±0.02%), and thickness (600 nm). The strain state of the samples was determined by in situ substrate curvature monitoring, and by ex situ x-ray diffraction and plan-view transmission electron microscopy. We observe a slower rate of strain relaxation, and a 25% higher residual strain in the nitride. This is attributed to the presence of nitrogen interstitials in the InGaAsN epilayers and/or to the higher nitrogen bond strengths.

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.228 · 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