Graphene CVD: Interplay Between Growth and Etching on Morphology and Stacking by Hydrogen and Oxidizing Impurities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The growth of high quality graphene layers by chemical vapor deposition (CVD) has been found to strongly depend on growth conditions with results varying greatly from one laboratory to another for nominally identical conditions. We report the results of a systematic investigation of the role of hydrogen and oxidizing impurities present in the gas feedstock during the growth and cooling stages in low-pressure CVD. First, we show that for a partial pressure of oxidizing impurities below 1 ppb, hydrogen is not required for graphene growth from methane. Second, we demonstrate that purified hydrogen does not etch graphene films at typical growth temperatures. Third, a flow of purified hydrogen during cooling counterbalances graphene etching by oxygen, thus protecting the films. Films grown under high purity conditions (low level of oxidizing impurities) exhibit a higher bilayer and multilayer coverage; Surprisingly some of these bi- and multilayer graphene islands are twisted with respect to the first graphene layer as revealed by hyperspectral Raman imaging. Overall, this growth behavior suggests a competitive action between film growth from the carbon precursors and etching by the oxidative species. Our results provide new fundamental insights on the graphene CVD growth, highlighting the important yet indirect role of hydrogen and its major influence on controlling the action of oxidizing impurities on nucleation and etching during the growth process.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".