MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043058364 · doi:10.1063/1.3103332

Quantum well intermixing of a quantum well structure grown on an InAsP metamorphic pseudosubstrate on InP

2009· article· en· W2043058364 on OpenAlexaff
O. Hulko, D. A. Thompson, B. J. Robinson, J.G. Simmons

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSemiconductor Quantum Structures and Devices
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotoluminescenceQuantum wellMaterials scienceOptoelectronicsMetamorphic rockSubstrate (aquarium)Condensed matter physicsHeterojunctionLaser linewidthBarrier layerGallium arsenideDiffusionLayer (electronics)OpticsNanotechnologyPhysicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

InGaAsP quantum well (QW) structures, with ∼1% compressive strain, have been grown on an InAs0.21P0.79 metamorphic substrate layer (MSL) deposited on an InP substrate. For comparison, a similar QW structure is grown directly on InP. A consequence of growth on the MSL is to move the QW and barrier compositions outside the spinodal isotherm resulting in a significant reduction in phase separation. This is shown to increase the photoluminescence wavelength and improve its quality in terms of linewidth and intensity. Thermally induced QW intermixing (QWI) has also been carried out on these structures both with and without a low-temperature InP capping layer. The defects present in the underlying metamorphic buffer layers are shown to have no effect on the QWI process. However, the samples with the MSL are shown to exhibit more intermixing either due to a higher diffusion or greater P–As exchange probability in the different composition QW and barrier layers compared to the QW structure grown without the MSL, and possibly influenced by the large reduction in phase separation.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.256
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicSemiconductor Quantum Structures and DevicesFrench-language works237,207