MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2204485311 · doi:10.1002/sca.21280

Detailed Monte Carlo Simulation of electron transport and electron energy loss spectra

2015· article· en· W2204485311 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Attarian Shandiz, F. Salvat, Raynald Gauvin

Bibliographic record

VenueScanning · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundGeneralitat de CatalunyaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodElectronScatteringPhotoelectric effectElectron scatteringAtomic physicsComputational physicsElastic scatteringSpectral lineOscillator strengthPhysicsMaterials scienceOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A computer program for detailed Monte Carlo simulation of the transport of electrons with kinetic energies in the range between about 0.1 and about 500 keV in bulk materials and in thin solid films is presented. Elastic scattering is described from differential cross sections calculated by the relativistic (Dirac) partial-wave expansion method with different models of the scattering potential. Inelastic interactions are simulated from an optical-data model based on an empirical optical oscillator strength that combines optical functions of the solid with atomic photoelectric data. The generalized oscillator strength is built from the adopted optical oscillator strength by using an extension algorithm derived from Lindhard's dielectric function for a free-electron gas. It is shown that simulated backscattering fractions of electron beams from bulk (semi-infinite) specimens are in good agreement with experimental data for beam energies from 0.1 keV up to about 100 keV. Simulations also yield transmitted and backscattered fractions of electron beams on thin solid films that agree closely with measurements for different film thicknesses and incidence angles. Simulated most probable deflection angles and depth-dose distributions also agree satisfactorily with measurements. Finally, electron energy loss spectra of several elemental solids are simulated and the effects of the beam energy and the foil thickness on the signal to background and signal to noise ratios are investigated. SCANNING 38:475-491, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScanningSame topicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207