MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2513770204 · doi:10.1149/ma2016-02/2/203

Lithium Detection in the Electron Microscope

2016· article· en· W2513770204 on OpenAlexaff
Raynald Gauvin, Nicolas Brodusch, Hendrix Demers, George P. Demopoulos, Karim Zaghib

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroanalysisField emission gunElectron beam-induced depositionLithium (medication)Electron microscopeEnergy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopyField electron emissionMaterials scienceCathode rayElectronScanning electron microscopeCathodeElectron energy loss spectroscopySpectroscopyResolution (logic)Environmental scanning electron microscopeMicroscopeField emission microscopyWork (physics)Image resolutionScanning transmission electron microscopyOpticsNanotechnologyChemistryPhysicsTransmission electron microscopyDiffractionComputer scienceNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper will present the results for the determination of concentration of Li in silicates cathode materials using x-ray microanalysis with windowless SDD EDS technology and with Electron Energy Loss Spectroscopy (EELS) with state of the art field emission scanning electron microscopes at high spatial resolution. Advantages and disadvantages of both techniques will be covered. The aim of this work is to characterize Li concentration variation at the nm scale in batteries materials. The issue of electron beam damage will be covered and the advantage to work at electron beam energies below 30 keV will be demonstrated.

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)0.002
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207