MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050893368 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.65.155315

Kinetic roughening of GaAs(001) during thermal<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Cl</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math>etching

2002· article· lv· W2050893368 on OpenAlexaff
Jens H. Schmid, Anders Ballestad, B. J. Ruck, M. Adamcyk, T. Tiedje

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B, Condensed matter · 2002
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNabla symbolSurface roughnessPhysicsScatteringSurface (topology)Materials scienceCrystallographyCondensed matter physicsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)GeometryOpticsThermodynamicsChemistryQuantum mechanicsOmegaMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The surface morphology of ${\mathrm{Cl}}_{2}$-etched GaAs(001) is measured as a function of etch time by atomic force microscopy and elastic light scattering. A flat surface is found to become rougher during the etch whereas a textured substrate becomes smoother. We have numerically simulated this behavior. It is found that the evolution of surface roughness at length scales between 50 nm and $5 \ensuremath{\mu}\mathrm{m}$ can be described with excellent accuracy by a continuum equation for the surface height $h(\stackrel{\ensuremath{\rightarrow}}{x},t),$ which is given by $dh/dt=\ensuremath{\nu}{\ensuremath{\nabla}}^{2}h\ensuremath{-}\ensuremath{\lambda}/2(\ensuremath{\nabla}{h)}^{2}\ensuremath{-}K{\ensuremath{\nabla}}^{4}h+\ensuremath{\eta},$ where $\ensuremath{\eta}$ is a random noise input.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.6220.005

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.228 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations9
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B, Condensed matterSame topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207