Influence of deposition temperature on structural, morphological, and optical properties of ZnS thin films
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ZnS thin films were deposited onto glass substrates by chemical bath deposition (CBD) technique at different deposition temperatures (75, 80, 85, 90 °C) with non-toxic complexing agent tri-sodium citrate. Effects of deposition temperature on structural, morphological, and optical properties of thin films were investigated by using X-ray diffraction (XRD), field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM), and ultraviolet–visible spectroscopy, respectively. The XRD results show that all produced ZnS thin films have cubic structure. The calculated grain size values are between 13 and 26 nm. It was observed that the grain size values increase and crystallization of films improve as the deposition temperature increases. The FESEM images reveal that film surfaces are formed by almost homogeneously dispersed nanostructured particles. Optical characterization results show that ZnS thin films have high transmittance of about 80% in the range of 400–800 nm with band gap energy values between 3.52 and 3.65 eV. As the deposition temperature increases, the band gap energy values increase. According to these results, it was observed that the structural, morphological, and optical properties of ZnS films vary depending on the deposition temperature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".