MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ordered arrays of lead zirconium titanate nanorings

2008· article· en· W2077416550 on OpenAlexaff
David Byrne, A. Schilling, J. F. Scott, J. M. Gregg

Bibliographic record

VenueNanotechnology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicFerroelectric and Piezoelectric Materials
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilDepartment for Employment and Learning, Northern Ireland
KeywordsMaterials sciencePhase boundaryFerroelectricityNanostructureTransmission electron microscopyAnnealing (glass)Lead titanateNanowireNanotechnologyPhase (matter)OptoelectronicsComposite materialDielectric

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Periodic arrays of nanorings of morphotropic phase boundary lead zirconium titanate (PZT) have been successfully fabricated using a novel self-assembly technique: close-packed monolayers of latex nanospheres were deposited onto Pt-coated silicon substrates, and then plasma cleaned to form ordered arrays of isolated nanospheres, not in contact with each other. Subsequent pulsed laser deposition of PZT, high angle argon ion etching and thermal annealing created the arrays of isolated nanorings, with diameters of ∼100 nm and wall thicknesses of ∼10 nm. Energy dispersive x-ray analysis confirms that the rings are compositionally morphotropic phase boundary PZT, and high resolution transmission electron microscopy imaging of lattice fringes demonstrates some periodicities consistent with perovskite rather than pyrochlore material. The dimensions of these nanorings, and the expected 'soft' behaviour of the ferroelectric material from which they are made, means that they offer the most likely opportunity to date for observing whether or not vortex arrangements of electrical dipoles, analogous to those seen in ferromagnetic nanostructures, actually exist.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.781

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.206 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNanotechnologySame topicFerroelectric and Piezoelectric MaterialsFrench-language works237,207