MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104094171 · doi:10.1002/smll.201001745

Scanning Transmission X‐Ray Microscopy as a Novel Tool to Probe Colloidal and Photonic Crystals

2011· article· en· W2104094171 on OpenAlexafffund
Matti M. van Schooneveld, Jan Hilhorst, Andrei V. Petukhov, Tolek Tyliszczak, Jian Wang, Bert M. Weckhuysen, Frank M. F. de Groot, Emiel de Smit

Bibliographic record

VenueSmall · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsCanadian Light Source (Canada)University of Saskatchewan
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMaterials scienceColloidal crystalPhotonic crystalScanning confocal electron microscopyMicroscopyMicrometerNanotechnologyTransmission electron microscopyScanning electron microscopePolystyreneResolution (logic)Scanning ion-conductance microscopyPhotonicsOpticsColloidScanning probe microscopyScanning transmission electron microscopyFluorescenceConfocal microscopyOptoelectronicsPolymerChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photonic crystals consisting of nano- to micrometer-sized building blocks, such as multiple sorts of colloids, have recently received widespread attention. It remains a challenge, however, to adequately probe the internal crystal structure and the corresponding deformations that inhibit the proper functioning of such materials. It is shown that scanning transmission X-ray microscopy (STXM) can directly reveal the local structure, orientations, and even deformations in polystyrene and silica colloidal crystals with 30-nm spatial resolution. Moreover, STXM is capable of imaging a diverse range of crystals, including those that are dry and inverted, and provides novel insights complementary to information obtained by benchmark confocal fluorescence and scanning electron microscopy techniques.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.736

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSmallSame topicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207