MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067349457 · doi:10.1119/1.1930867

A simple method for simulating scanning tunneling images

2005· article· en· W2067349457 on OpenAlex
Bernd Donner, M. Kleber, Christian Bracher, H. J. Kreuzer

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum and electron transport phenomena
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftKillam TrustsAlexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
KeywordsScanning tunneling microscopePhysicsPauli exclusion principleObservableElectronScanning tunneling spectroscopyQuantum tunnellingScatteringSpin polarized scanning tunneling microscopyAtomic physicsQuantum mechanicsCondensed matter physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Real-space observation of single atoms and electron surface states lies at the heart of scanning tunneling microscopy. The resolution of atomic structures depends on quantum mechanical features such as three-dimensional tunneling, the Pauli principle, the possibility of electron resonances, and the importance of multiple scattering events, which allow the current carrying electrons to detect single atoms and explore electronic properties of surfaces. We present a simple calculation that leads directly to experimentally observable quantities. The starting point of the calculation is the treatment of the scanning tunneling microscope (STM) as an open quantum system, with the tip being a point-like source (or sink) of electrons. Our STM image simulations of corral-like adsorbate structures bear strong resemblance to the experimental results by Crommie et al. [Science 262, 218–220 (1993); Physica D 83, 98–108 (1995)].

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.287 · 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