Biaxial ZnO−ZnS Nanoribbon Heterostructures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biaxial ZnO−ZnS heterostructure nanoribbons (NRs) have been synthesized using the vapor−liquid−solid technique by the thermal evaporation of ZnS powder in the presence of a Au nanoparticles catalyst, a limited supply of oxygen and an inert carrier gas under controlled temperature and pressure. High resolution transmission electron microscopy (HRTEM) reveals that the nanoribbon is composed of two biaxially grown nanoribbons of single crystal (wurtzite) of ZnS and ZnO with widths of 10−100 and 20 −500 nm, respectively, with an Au nanoparticle tip but no clearly detectable defects. The interfacial region is smooth and narrow (∼10 nm for a wire of several 100 nm wide). It is proposed that a composite was first formed via single catalyst confined growth; that is, while ZnS grows vertically via precipitation from the saturated solution in Au, the ZnO component on the surface of the ZnS subsequently served as the substrate for laterally growth-forming ZnO nanoribbon. The implication of this technique for the synthesis of other composite nanostructures is noted.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".