MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071944546 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.71.075316

Scanning capacitance microscopy of nanostructures

2005· article· en· W2071944546 on OpenAlexaff
Harry E. Ruda, A. Shik

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicForce Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanowireNanodotMaterials scienceCapacitanceNanostructureDopingQuantum dotPlane (geometry)MicroscopyOptoelectronicsNanotechnologyOrientation (vector space)Scanning electron microscopeOpticsPhysicsQuantum mechanicsGeometryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A theory is developed for scanning capacitance microscopy (SCM) of samples containing quantum wells, nanowires, and nanodots. The observed SCM image does not reproduce the geometric characteristics of the system but can be used for extracting some important information. For quantum wells and nanowire arrays, SCM gives an opportunity to determine the doping level of nanostructures. For individual nanowires and dots, the positions and amplitude of SCM maxima give, respectively, the in-plane location and the depth of the objects, and the pattern shape is extremely sensitive to the nanowire orientation.

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 score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Citations11
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review BSame topicForce Microscopy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207