MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075557111 · doi:10.1103/physreve.65.052801

Formation mechanism and dynamics in polymer surface gratings

2002· article· en· W2075557111 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicForce Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGratingAzobenzeneMaterials scienceHolographic gratingPolymerHolographyOpticsRelaxation (psychology)ScatteringLight scatteringViscoelasticityMolecular physicsDiffraction gratingPhysicsOptoelectronicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the results of time-dependent x-ray and visible light (VIS) scattering measurements during formation of surface relief grating (SRG). These gratings are formed on polymer films containing azobenzene side groups during pulselike exposure with a holographic pattern of circularly polarized light at 488 nm. The SRG formation is accompanied by a density grating just below the film surface. Assuming viscoelastic flow, a change in polymer's elastic properties upon light exposure can explain the massive material transport. Finite element calculations reveal a dynamic model of grating formation characterized by different relaxation times. The simultaneous formation of a surface relief grating and of a density grating explains quantitatively the findings of the VIS experiment, but only qualitatively the findings of the x-ray measurements.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.293
Teacher spread0.285 · 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