Molecular QCA design with chemically reasonable constraints
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article we examine the impacts of the fundamental constraints required for circuits and systems made from molecular Quantum-dot Cellular Automata (QCA) devices. Our design constraints are “chemically reasonable” in that we consider the characteristics and dimensions of devices and scaffoldings that have actually been fabricated. This work is a necessary first step for any work in QCA CAD, and can also help shape experiments in the physical sciences for emerging, nano-scale devices. Our work shows that QCA circuits, scaffoldings, substrates, and devices should all be considered simultaneously. Otherwise, there is a very real possibility that the devices and scaffoldings that are eventually manufactured will result in devices that only work in isolation. “Chemically reasonable” also means that expected manufacturing defects must be considered. In our simulations we introduce defects associated with self-assembled systems into various designs to begin to define manufacturing tolerances. This work is especially timely as experimentalists are beginning to work on merging experimental tracks that address devices and scaffolds—and the end result should facilitate correct logical operations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it