MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326144977 · doi:10.1021/nl504197c

Space-Charge Limited Transport in Large-Area Monolayer Hexagonal Boron Nitride

2015· article· en· W2326144977 on OpenAlexafffund
Farzaneh Mahvash, Etienne Paradis, Dominique Drouin, Thomas Szkopek, Mohamed Siaj

Bibliographic record

VenueNano Letters · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphene research and applications
Canadian institutionsInstitut interdisciplinaire d'innovation technologiqueUniversité de SherbrookeMcGill UniversityUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsMonolayerHexagonal boron nitrideMaterials scienceCharge (physics)NanotechnologyHexagonal crystal systemSpace (punctuation)Chemical physicsBoron nitrideBoronCondensed matter physicsCrystallographyChemistryPhysicsGrapheneComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hexagonal boron nitride (hBN) is a wide-gap material that has attracted significant attention as an ideal dielectric substrate for 2D crystal heterostructures. We report here the first observation of in-plane charge transport in large-area monolayer hBN, grown by chemical vapor deposition. The quadratic scaling of current with voltage at high bias corresponds to a space-charge limited conduction mechanism, with a room-temperature mobility reaching up to 0.01 cm(2)/(V s) at electric fields up to 100 kV/cm in the absence of dielectric breakdown. The observation of in-plane charge transport highlights the semiconducting nature of monolayer hBN, and identifies hBN as a wide-gap 2D crystal capable of supporting charge transport at high field. Future exploration of charge transport in hBN is motivated by the fundamental study of UV optoelectronics and the massive Dirac fermion spectrum of hBN.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations53
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNano LettersSame topicGraphene research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207