MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092602376 · doi:10.1021/ja909139n

Phenylacetylene One-Dimensional Nanostructures on the Si(100)-2 × 1:H Surface

2010· article· en· W2092602376 on OpenAlexaff
Michael A. Walsh, Stephanie R. Walter, Kirk H. Bevan, Franz M. Geiger, Mark C. Hersam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Chemical Society · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersDivision of Materials Research
KeywordsPhenylacetyleneChemistryScanning tunneling microscopeNanostructureDensity functional theoryDimerSiliconMoleculeBinding energyCrystallographyNanotechnologyComputational chemistryAtomic physicsMaterials sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using ultrahigh vacuum (UHV) scanning tunneling microscopy (STM), many olefins have been shown to self-assemble on the hydrogen-passivated Si(100)-2 x 1 surface into one-dimensional nanostructures. This paper demonstrates that similar one-dimensional nanostructures can also be realized using alkynes. In particular, UHV STM, sum frequency generation (SFG), and density functional theory (DFT) are employed to study the growth mechanism and binding configuration of phenylacetylene (PA) one-dimensional nanostructures on the Si(100)-2 x 1:H surface. Molecular-resolution UHV STM images reveal the binding position and spacing of PA with respect to the underlying silicon dimer rows. Furthermore, UHV STM characterization of heteromolecular one-dimensional nanostructures of styrene and PA shows distinct electronic contrast between the two molecules, which is confirmed using simulated STM images derived from DFT and provides insight into the nature of PA binding to silicon. Additional evidence from SFG measurements corroborates the conclusion that the terminal carbon atoms of PA retain pi-conjugation following reaction to the Si(100)-2 x 1:H surface.

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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.505

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.252
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations26
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Chemical SocietySame topicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical StudiesFrench-language works237,207