MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Molecular Architectonic on Metal Surfaces

2007· review· en· W2147592303 on OpenAlexafffund
Johannes V. Barth

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Physical Chemistry · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSurface Chemistry and Catalysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungEuropean Science Foundation
KeywordsNanodeviceNanotechnologyTerminologySelf-assemblyScanning tunneling microscopeMaterials scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The engineering of highly organized systems from instructed molecular building blocks opens up new vistas for the control of matter and the exploration of nanodevice concepts. Recent investigations demonstrate that well-defined surfaces provide versatile platforms for steering and monitoring the assembly of molecular nanoarchitectures in exquisite detail. This review delineates the principles of noncovalent synthesis on metal substrates under ultrahigh vacuum conditions and briefly assesses the pertaining terminology-self-assembly, self-organization, and self-organized growth. It presents exemplary scanning-tunneling-microscopy observations, providing atomistic insight into the self-assembly of organic clusters, chains, and superlattices, and the metal-directed assembly of low-dimensional coordination architectures. This review also describes hierarchic-assembly protocols leading to intricate multilevel order. Molecular architectonic on metal surfaces represents a versatile rationale to realize structurally complex nanosystems with specific shape, composition, and functional properties, which bear promise for technological applications.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1,037
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Physical ChemistrySame topicSurface Chemistry and CatalysisFrench-language works237,207