MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044876986 · doi:10.1063/1.1384861

Interpretation and modeling of buried InAs quantum dots on GaAs and InP substrates

2001· article· en· W2044876986 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSemiconductor Quantum Structures and Devices
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Microstructural SciencesJDSU (Canada)National Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFacetingQuantum dotTransmission electron microscopyMaterials scienceOptoelectronicsGallium arsenideCondensed matter physicsPopulationNanotechnologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comparisons of buried InAs/GaAs and InAs/InP quantum dots (QDs) utilizing transmission electron microscopy display interesting parallels and differences between the two systems. The higher 7.2% misfit in the InAs/GaAs system produces small (∼20 nm diameter) QDs with a majority displaying a predominately round shape. The lower 3.2% misfit in the InAs/InP system produces larger QDs (∼35 nm diameter) with the majority also displaying a predominately round shape. In both systems, the size of the QDs can be varied by changes in growth procedures and the largest QDs in any population show evidence of faceting

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.207
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.242 · 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