MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158348000 · doi:10.1002/pssa.200306496

Selective porosification of n-InP(100) after focused ion beam implantation of Si

2003· article· en· W2158348000 on OpenAlexaff
U. Schlierf, G. Champion, G. I. Sproule, S. Moisa, J. Fraser, M. J. Graham, Patrik Schmuki

Bibliographic record

Venuephysica status solidi (a) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSilicon and Solar Cell Technologies
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Microstructural Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIonIon implantationIon beamMaterials scienceIon beam depositionBeam (structure)OptoelectronicsEngineering physicsChemistryOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Selective pore formation can be electrochemically initiated on n-type InP(100) on presensitized surfaces. To create this presensitization, defect patterns were written into the surface by focused ion beam (FIB) implantation of Si++. These implant sites represent initiation sites for pore growth or for selective material dissolution in the patterns, if anodic polarization is carried out positive to the pore formation potential (PFP) of the defective surface but cathodic to the PFP of the intact surface. A variety of internal and external factors were found to influence the selectivity of the process. Parameters that significantly affect the morphology are polarization voltage, implantation dosage, the time and the anion present in the electrolyte. In the present work it is shown, that pore formation in 1 M HF only occurs for a small potential range and a certain dosage range of the implanted Si++ ions. At other potentials or dosages, a homogenous dissolution of the implanted patterns takes place. Apart from direct selective porosification of InP surfaces, the process described can be used for a selective surface patterning.

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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuephysica status solidi (a)Same topicSilicon and Solar Cell TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207