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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.021
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 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

Citations47
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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