MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313806264 · doi:10.1063/1.4944559

Low vibration high numerical aperture automated variable temperature Raman microscope

2016· article· en· W2313806264 on OpenAlexafffund
Yao Tian, Anjan Reijnders, Gavin B. Osterhoudt, Ilya Valmianski, Juan Gabriel Ramírez, Christian Urban, Ruidan Zhong, John Schneeloch, Genda Gu, Isaac Henslee, Kenneth S. Burch

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPhase-change materials and chalcogenides
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRaman spectroscopyRaman microscopeMicroscopeMaterials scienceOpticsPolarization (electrochemistry)Optical microscopeMicroscopyVibrationThermalNumerical apertureSIGNAL (programming language)OptoelectronicsRaman scatteringScanning electron microscopeChemistryComposite materialAcousticsPhysicsThermodynamicsComputer scienceWavelength

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Raman micro-spectroscopy is well suited for studying a variety of properties and has been applied to a wide range of areas. Combined with tuneable temperature, Raman spectra can offer even more insights into the properties of materials. However, previous designs of variable temperature Raman microscopes have made it extremely challenging to measure samples with low signal levels due to thermal and positional instabilities as well as low collection efficiencies. Thus contemporary Raman microscope has found limited applicability to probing the subtle physics involved in phase transitions and hysteresis. This paper describes a new design of a closed-cycle, Raman microscope with full polarization rotation. High collection efficiency, thermal stability, and mechanical stability are ensured by both deliberate optical, cryogenic, and mechanical design. Measurements on two samples, Bi2Se3 and V2O3, which are challenging due to low thermal conductivities, low signal levels, and/or hysteretic effects, are measured with previously undemonstrated temperature resolution.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations23
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicPhase-change materials and chalcogenidesFrench-language works237,207