MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2503443380 · doi:10.1149/07508.0751ecst

Impurity and Defect Monitoring in Hexagonal Si and SiGe Nanocrystals

2016· article· en· W2503443380 on OpenAlexaff
Sebastian Koelling, Rianne C. Plantenga, Håkon Ikaros T. Hauge, Yizhen Ren, Ang Li, Marcel A. Verheijen, Sònia Conesa-Boj, Simone Assali, P. M. Koenraad, Erik P. A. M. Bakkers

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Transactions · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Materials Characterization Techniques
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersUniversity of Sydney
KeywordsMaterials scienceGermaniumSiliconImpurityEpitaxyOptoelectronicsGallium phosphideSemiconductorGalliumNanotechnologyChemistryMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Silicon-Germanium in a hexagonal crystal-structure is a candidate material for a direct band-gap group IV semiconductor that can be integrated into the CMOS process. It has recently been synthesized as a crystalline shell grown epitaxial around a nanowire core of hexagonal Gallium-Phosphide. In order to study the optical properties of this newly generated material and evaluate its potential for building optical devices it is necessary to grow defect and impurity free hexagonal Silicon-Germanium. Impurity detection and mapping in nano-structures is however challenging as most bulk and thin film characterization methods cannot be used. Here we show that Atom Probe Tomography can be used to map the impurities in hexagonal shells of Silicon-Germanium and Silicon. This will allow to optimize growth of hexagonal Silicon-Germanium nanocrystals towards impurity free, optically active crystals.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS TransactionsSame topicAdvanced Materials Characterization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207