MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031349180 · doi:10.1063/1.4872383

Four-probe measurements with a three-probe scanning tunneling microscope

2014· article· en· W2031349180 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Salomons, Bruno Martins, Janik Zikovsky, Robert A. Wolkow

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSurface and Thin Film Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaNational Institute for Nanotechnology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceScanning probe microscopyScanning tunneling microscopeScanning Hall probe microscopeMicroscopeConductive atomic force microscopyScanning electron microscopeOpticsScanning ion-conductance microscopyField ion microscopeElectrochemical scanning tunneling microscopeConventional transmission electron microscopeScanning capacitance microscopyOptoelectronicsNanotechnologyScanning confocal electron microscopyScanning tunneling spectroscopyAtomic force microscopyScanning transmission electron microscopyIonPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an ultrahigh vacuum (UHV) three-probe scanning tunneling microscope in which each probe is capable of atomic resolution. A UHV JEOL scanning electron microscope aids in the placement of the probes on the sample. The machine also has a field ion microscope to clean, atomically image, and shape the probe tips. The machine uses bare conductive samples and tips with a homebuilt set of pliers for heating and loading. Automated feedback controlled tip-surface contacts allow for electrical stability and reproducibility while also greatly reducing tip and surface damage due to contact formation. The ability to register inter-tip position by imaging of a single surface feature by multiple tips is demonstrated. Four-probe material characterization is achieved by deploying two tips as fixed current probes and the third tip as a movable voltage probe.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations8
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicSurface and Thin Film PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207