MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954209036 · doi:10.1002/adfm.201901266

Second Harmonic Generation Investigation of Symmetry Breaking and Flexoelectricity Induced by Nanoindentations in SrTiO<sub>3</sub>

2019· article· en· W2954209036 on OpenAlexafffund
Gitanjali Kolhatkar, Mischa Nicklaus, Azza Hadj Youssef, C. V. Cojocaru, Maxime Rivard, Alexandre Merlen, François Légaré, Andreas Ruëdiger

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Functional Materials · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicForce Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceNanoindentationIndentationFlexoelectricityRaman spectroscopyCondensed matter physicsModulusComposite materialPiezoelectricityElastic modulusOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Strain gradients induced by nanoindentations in bulk undoped strontium titanate (SrTiO 3 ) are investigated. After indenting a 850 nm deep pattern on the SrTiO 3 surface with a 8 GPa hardness and an 83 GPa indentation modulus by a Berkovich tip, the resulting deformation patterns are imaged by Raman spectroscopy and by second harmonic generation microscopy. Cross‐shaped compressively stressed regions along the cubic SrTiO 3 primary slip planes are observed. These zones relax toward the unstrained bulk material through localized strain gradients on a length scale of several microns. Second harmonic tomography reveals the reduction of the crystal's centrosymmetry in the vicinity of the crosslike features due to a strain gradient. These results indicate the appearance of flexoelectricity following the nanoindentation process due to the creation of an inhomogeneous strain.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations21
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Functional MaterialsSame topicForce Microscopy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207