MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036855874 · doi:10.1149/1.3111037

First Principles Model of Amorphous Silicon Lithiation

2009· article· en· W2036855874 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSemiconductor materials and interfaces
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKillam TrustsDalhousie University
KeywordsAmorphous solidProtocol (science)Amorphous siliconProjectorSimple (philosophy)Materials scienceSiliconComputer scienceYield (engineering)Biological systemChemistryOptoelectronicsCrystalline siliconCrystallographyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A protocol to simulate the lithiation of amorphous Si at room temperature is presented. One important step in the protocol is the identification of spherical voids in the lithiated structure. The protocol is simple, easily implemented and automated, and can be used with any modeling code capable of structural optimization. The protocol was used in conjunction with density functional theory and projector augmented wave data sets to accurately reproduce the potential composition curve of an experimental electrochemical cell at room temperature. Volume changes as a function of lithiation obtained from the protocol were also in good agreement with experiment. Based on the agreement with experiment, the protocol appears to yield structures representative of amorphous obtained when lithiating Si at room temperature.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.216 · 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