MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163643825 · doi:10.1002/jemt.22099

Mechanisms of radiation damage in beam‐sensitive specimens, for TEM accelerating voltages between 10 and 300 kV

2012· article· en· W2163643825 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroscopy Research and Technique · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIon-surface interactions and analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiation damageStopping powerIonizationAcceleration voltageRadiolysisScatteringMaterials scienceElectronIrradiationSecondary electronsBeam (structure)RadiationDisplacement (psychology)Atomic physicsHydrogenCross section (physics)ChemistryCathode rayOpticsNuclear physicsPhysicsIonDetector

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ionization damage (radiolysis) and knock-on displacement are compared in terms of scattering cross section and stopping power, for thin organic specimens exposed to the electrons in a TEM. Based on stopping power, which includes secondary processes, radiolysis is found to be predominant for all incident energies (10-300 keV), even in materials containing hydrogen. For conducting inorganic specimens, knock-on displacement is the only damage mechanism but an electron dose exceeding 1000 C cm(-2) is usually required. Ways of experimentally determining the damage mechanism (with a view to minimizing damage) are discussed.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.311 · 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