MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023199958 · doi:10.1116/1.1460898

Galvanic corrosion behavior of GaAs in acid solutions

2002· article· en· W2023199958 on OpenAlexafffund
Gengsheng. Weng, Jing‐Li Luo, Douglas G. Ivey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vacuum Science & Technology A Vacuum Surfaces and Films · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSemiconductor materials and devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCorrosionGalvanic cellPolarization (electrochemistry)AnodeMaterials scienceCathodic protectionGalvanic corrosionDopantSuperposition principleCathodeSemiconductorAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Composite materialMetallurgyChemistryElectrodeOptoelectronicsDopingPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The galvanic corrosion behavior of both n-GaAs and p-GaAs coupled to Au, at room temperature, have been examined using the zero resistance ammeter technique (direct measurement), as well as the method of superposition of polarization curves (indirect measurement). Galvanic current densities, which can be converted to corrosion rates, were measured as a function of the cathode-to-anode (C /A) area ratio. In addition, corrosion rates were predicted from superposition of cathodic polarization curves for Au and anodic polarization curves for GaAs. With some exceptions, the current densities increased with increasing C/A ratio, and the agreement between the indirect and direct measurements was quite good. This indicates that the former can be used to determine semiconductor corrosion rates. Sample surfaces, examined using transmission electron microscopy, showed an As-rich surface layer, with a thickness dependent on dopant type and polarization potential.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
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
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vacuum Science & Technology A Vacuum Surfaces and FilmsSame topicSemiconductor materials and devicesFrench-language works237,207