MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070948956 · doi:10.1063/1.2082004

A versatile instrument for <i>in</i> <i>situ</i> combination of scanning probe microscopy and time-of-flight mass spectrometry

2005· article· en· W2070948956 on OpenAlexaff
Adrian Wetzel, Anisoara Socoliuc, Ernst Meyer, Roland Bennewitz, Enrico Gnecco, Christoph Gerber

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicForce Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
KeywordsScanning probe microscopyMass spectrometryMaterials scienceCharacterization (materials science)MicroscopeNanometreTungstenSpectrometerMicroscopyScanning ion-conductance microscopyScanning electron microscopeAnalytical Chemistry (journal)OpticsNanotechnologyScanning confocal electron microscopyChemistryPhysicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A scanning probe microscope is combined with a time-of-flight mass spectrometer that analyzes material from the tip of the probe microscope. Chemical analysis on the nanometer scale is achieved by transferring material from surfaces via the probing tip to the mass spectrometer under ultrahigh vacuum conditions. Fast switching between scanning probe and mass analysis operation is implemented by means of a motorized rotatable probe holder. Electrochemically etched tungsten tips are used as probes for the experiments. Thorough characterization of the tips by means of field-emission measurements is crucial for successful experiments. Quartz tuning forks have been applied as force sensors in force microscopy experiments.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.268 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations24
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicForce Microscopy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207