MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333075489 · doi:10.1021/jp508286q

Assessing the Gold Standard: The Complex Vibrational Nonlinear Susceptibility of Metals

2014· article· en· W2333075489 on OpenAlexafffund
Paul A. Covert, Dennis K. Hore

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhase (matter)Chemical physicsMetalCharacterization (materials science)DielectricWavelengthPolarity (international relations)Materials scienceChemistryMolecular physicsNanotechnologyOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sum-frequency generation techniques can offer molecular-level, structural details of surfaces and interfaces. The incorporation of a metallic layer, either exposed or buried, is frequently used to provide a nonvibrationally resonant reference to which the phase of the resonant responses may be compared. This in turn provides further structural information, such as the polarity of interfacial groups. Because the phase of the metal depends strongly on factors that alter the electronic structure of the interface, such as the wavelength of the visible beam, chemical bonding, and surface coverage, it is beneficial to characterize the phase of the nonresonant response. A direct measurement of the absolute phase of a commonly prepared model hydrophobic surface, 1-octadecanethiol bound to gold, is presented and compared with relative phase measurements. Assignment of the phase of metallic samples requires careful consideration of the effects of the local field upon phase in both the near and far fields. We have outlined an approach that is suitable for the characterization of any dielectric or metal surface.

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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

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)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations47
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry CSame topicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical StudiesFrench-language works237,207