Comparison of the Optical Properties of Tantalum Pentoxide, Ta<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub>, Anodically Grown from E-beam Deposited Tantalum, Ta, with Ta<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> E-beam Deposited from a Ta<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> Source
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The optical properties of Ta 2 O 5 anodically grown from e-beam deposited Ta have been compared with Ta 2 O 5 e-beam deposited from a Ta 2 O 5 source. Optical data were collected with a J. V. Woollam Co., Inc., Spectroscopic Ellipsometer, VASE. Measurements were conducted under the same conditions for both types of samples. Within the precision limits of our ellipsometer and for the thicknesses of the films studied, the absorption coefficient, α, was zero for anodically grown Ta 2 O 5 over a very wide range of wavelengths, including the 1310 nm and 1550 nm telecommunications windows. By contrast, the e-beam deposited Ta 2 O 5 layers had only a very narrow window in the visible range. Both types had the absorption coefficient of zero at some wavelengths in the ultraviolet range. The anodically grown Ta 2 O 5 layers had a calculated average energy gap of 4.23 eV +/- 0.02 eV and a maximum dielectric constant of 28.73.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".