Tip convolution on HOPG surfaces measured in AM-AFM and interpreted using a combined experimental and simulation approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amplitude modulated atomic force microscopy (AM-AFM) was used to examine the influence of the size of the AFM tip apex on the measured surface topography of single highly oriented pyrolytic graphite (HOPG) atomic steps. Experimental measurements were complemented by molecular dynamics simulations of AM-AFM and the results from both were evaluated by comparison of the measured or simulated width of the topography at the step to that predicted using simple rigid-body geometry. The results showed that the step width, which is a reflection of the resolution of the measurement, increased with tip size, as expected, but also that the difference between the measured/simulated step width and the geometric calculation was tip size dependent. The simulations suggested that this may be due to the deformation of the bodies and the effect of that deformation on the interaction force and oscillation amplitude. Overall, this study showed that the resolution of AM-AFM measurements of atomic steps can be correlated to tip size and that this relationship is affected by the deformation of the system.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".