Metal/Metal‐Oxide Interfaces: How Metal Contacts Affect the Work Function and Band Structure of MoO<sub>3</sub>
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract When transition metal oxides are used in practical applications, such as organic electronics or heterogeneous catalysis, they often must be in contact with a metal. Metal contacts can affect an oxide's chemical and electronic properties within the first few nanometers of the contact, resulting in changes to an oxide's chemical reactivity, conductivity, and energy‐level alignment properties. These effects can alter an oxide's ability to perform its intended function. Thus, the choice of contacting metal becomes an important design consideration when tailoring the properties of transition‐metal oxide thin films or nanoparticles. Here, metal/metal‐oxide interfaces involving a widely used oxide in organic electronics, MoO 3 , are examined. It is demonstrated that metal contacts tend to reduce the Mo 6+ cation to lower oxidation states and, consequently, alter MoO 3 ’s valence electronic structure and work function when the oxide layer is very thin (less than 10 nm). MoO 3 becomes semimetallic and has a lower work function near metal contacts. The observed behavior is attributed to two causes: 1) charge transfer from the metal Fermi level into MoO 3 ’s low‐lying conduction band and 2) an oxidation‐reduction reaction between the metal and MoO 3 that results in oxidation of the metal and reduction of MoO 3 . These results illustrate how interfaces are important to an oxide's ability to provide energy‐level alignment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it