MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316928240 · doi:10.1166/jnn.2005.092

Functional Pattern Engineering in Glancing Angle Deposition Thin Films

2005· article· en· W2316928240 on OpenAlexafffund
Martin O. Jensen, Michael J. Brett

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicOptical Coatings and Gratings
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceThin filmDeposition (geology)Physical vapor depositionSurface micromachiningPlanarOptoelectronicsPulsed laser depositionNanotechnologyOpticsFabricationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a new method for making functional patterns in thin films consisting of highly ordered arrays of complex, submicrometer structures, deposited at oblique flux incidence angles using the glancing angle deposition technique. By performing physical vapor deposition on direct write seed layers with intentional point and line lattice defects, we are able to generate embedded air-filled linear and planar patterns in the films in a single-step transfer approach with no need for conventional postdeposition micromachining. The uniformity and porosity of the thin films is fully maintained, with minimal impact on the film morphology adjacent to the patterns. This ability to engineer air-filled patterns is crucial to several promising thin-film applications, including photonic band gap crystals and microfluidics.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.203 · 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
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

Citations20
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nanoscience and NanotechnologySame topicOptical Coatings and GratingsFrench-language works237,207