MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945740268 · doi:10.1002/aelm.201900098

Directed Assembly of Nanoparticle Threshold‐Selector Arrays

2019· article· en· W2945740268 on OpenAlexafffund
Maximilian Speckbacher, Michael Rinderle, Waldemar Kaiser, Eiman A. Osman, Domenikos Chryssikos, Anna Cattani‐Scholz, Julianne M. Gibbs, Alessio Gagliardi, Marc Tornow

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Electronic Materials · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Memory and Neural Computing
Canadian institutionsAlberta Glycomics CentreUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsMaterials scienceNanoclustersElectrical conductorNanotechnologyNanoparticleResistive random-access memorySurface modificationSilver nanoparticleSiliconElectrodeOptoelectronicsChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The directed assembly of ordered arrays of cubic silver nanoparticles featuring distinct electrical threshold‐switching characteristics is reported. Threshold selectors are key elements for nonvolatile resistive random‐access‐memory architectures, as they suppress sneak path currents in crosspoint arrays. Nanocubes are site‐selectively immobilized on a TiO2‐coated silicon surface via a complementary molecular surface functionalization of nanoparticles and substrate based on a Cu(I)‐catalyzed alkyne‐azide cycloaddition without any physical template. Electrical characterization of individual silver nanocubes by conductive‐probe atomic force microscopy reveals pronounced and reproducible threshold‐switching behavior, featuring ultralow OFF currents below 1 pA, steep turn‐on slopes of <50 mV dec−1 and ON‐OFF ratios in excess of 103. Numerical simulation of Ag‐ion migration dynamics in the TiO2 electrolyte using a kinetic Monte Carlo model supports a switching mechanism based on conductive filament formation from Ag nanoclusters, and their reversible rupture in the low‐voltage regime. Assembled Ag nanocube threshold selectors are proposed for applications in memristive memory architectures, in particular for future highly integrated 3D circuitry.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Electronic MaterialsSame topicAdvanced Memory and Neural ComputingFrench-language works237,207