MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Microsecond Valley Lifetime of Defect-Bound Excitons in Monolayer <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>WSe</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math>

2018· article· lv· W2834323504 on OpenAlexaff
Galan Moody, Kha Tran, Xiaobo Lu, Travis M. Autry, James M. Fräser, Richard P. Mirin, Li Yang, Xiaoqin Li, Kevin L. Silverman

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2018
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldMaterials Science
Topic2D Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyWelch FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMicrosecondExcitonPhysicsComputer scienceCondensed matter physicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In atomically thin two-dimensional semiconductors such as transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDs), controlling the density and type of defects promises to be an effective approach for engineering light-matter interactions. We demonstrate that electron-beam irradiation is a simple tool for selectively introducing defect-bound exciton states associated with chalcogen vacancies in TMDs. Our first-principles calculations and time-resolved spectroscopy measurements of monolayer WSe_{2} reveal that these defect-bound excitons exhibit exceptional optical properties including a recombination lifetime approaching 200 ns and a valley lifetime longer than 1 μs. The ability to engineer the crystal lattice through electron irradiation provides a new approach for tailoring the optical response of TMDs for photonics, quantum optics, and valleytronics applications.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations172
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topic2D Materials and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207