Scanning Electrochemical Microscopy: A Comprehensive Review of Experimental Parameters from 1989 to 2015
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
Scanning electrochemical microscopy (SECM) is an electroanalytical scanning probe technique capable of imaging substrate topography and local reactivity with high resolution. Since its inception in 1989, it has expanded into a wide variety of research areas including biology, corrosion, energy, kinetics, instrumental development, and surface modification. In the past 25 years, over 1800 peer-reviewed publications have focused on SECM, including several topical reviews. However, these reviews often omit key details, forcing readers to search the literature. In this review, we provide a comprehensive summary of the experimental parameters (e.g., solvents, probes, and mediators) used in all SECM publications since 1989, irrespective of the application. It can be used to rapidly assess experimental possibilities and make an informed decision about experimental design. In other words, it is a practical guide to SECM.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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