MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075837736 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.67.014208

Phenomenological model of anisotropic microstructures in<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>−</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">As</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math>chalcogenide glass

2003· article· lv· W2075837736 on OpenAlexfundno aff
K. Asatryan, Benoit Paquet, Tigran Galstian, Réal Vallée

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B, Condensed matter · 2003
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPhase-change materials and chalcogenides
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhenomenological modelAnisotropyMaterials scienceAmorphous solidExcited statePhysicsCondensed matter physicsCrystallographyOpticsAtomic physicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have studied the dichroism in a thin film of $a\ensuremath{-}{\mathrm{As}}_{2}{\mathrm{S}}_{3}$ (amorphous) induced by the exposition to linearly and circularly polarized bandgap light. Based on the analysis of photostationary excited states and the transitions between them, we propose a phenomenological model for the anisotropic microstructures that are responsible for the photoinduced anisotropy (PA) in this glass. Two microscopic models of PA among the variety of existing ones are considered more plausible in the sense of consistency with the proposed phenomenological model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B, Condensed matterSame topicPhase-change materials and chalcogenidesFrench-language works237,207