Calibration of higher eigenmodes of cantilevers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A method is presented for calibrating the higher eigenmodes (resonant modes) of atomic force microscopy cantilevers that can be performed prior to any tip-sample interaction. The method leverages recent efforts in accurately calibrating the first eigenmode by providing the higher-mode stiffness as a ratio to the first mode stiffness. A one-time calibration routine must be performed for every cantilever type to determine a power-law relationship between stiffness and frequency, which is then stored for future use on similar cantilevers. Then, future calibrations only require a measurement of the ratio of resonant frequencies and the stiffness of the first mode. This method is verified through stiffness measurements using three independent approaches: interferometric measurement, AC approach-curve calibration, and finite element analysis simulation. Power-law values for calibrating higher-mode stiffnesses are reported for several cantilever models. Once the higher-mode stiffnesses are known, the amplitude of each mode can also be calibrated from the thermal spectrum by application of the equipartition theorem.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 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 it