MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Diamond Deposition on Graphite in Hydrogen Microwave Plasma

2018· article· en· W2889212855 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Coating Science and Technology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicDiamond and Carbon-based Materials Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraphiteDiamondMicrowavePlasmaMaterials scienceHydrogenDeposition (geology)Composite materialChemistryComputer sciencePhysicsGeologyNuclear physicsOrganic chemistryTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrogen plasma etching of graphite generates radicals that can be used for diamond synthesis by chemical vapor deposition (CVD). We studied the etching of polycrystalline graphite by a hydrogen microwave plasma, growth of diamond particles of the non-seeded graphite substrates, and characterized the diamond morphology, grain size distribution, growth rate, and phase purity. The graphite substrates served simultaneously as a carbon source, this being the specific feature of the process. A disorder of the graphite surface structure reduces as the result of the etching as revealed with Raman spectroscopy. The diamond growth rate of 3 – 5 µm/h was achieved, the quality of the produced diamond grains improving with growth time due to inherently nonstationary graphite etching process

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 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.254 · 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