MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954911599 · doi:10.3762/bjnano.10.132

Nanoscale spatial mapping of mechanical properties through dynamic atomic force microscopy

2019· article· en· W2954911599 on OpenAlex
Zahra Abooalizadeh, L. J. Sudak, Philip Egberts

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBeilstein Journal of Nanotechnology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicForce Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsElastic modulusMaterials scienceModulusHighly oriented pyrolytic graphiteNanoindentationNanoscopic scaleNon-contact atomic force microscopyYoung's modulusAtomic force microscopyConductive atomic force microscopyComposite materialNanotechnologyGraphite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dynamic atomic force microscopy (AFM) was employed to spatially map the elastic modulus of highly oriented pyrolytic graphite (HOPG), specifically by using force modulation microscopy (FMM) and contact resonance (CR) AFM. In both of these techniques, a variation in the amplitude signal was observed when scanning over an uncovered step edge of HOPG. In comparison, no variation in the amplitude signal was observed when scanning over a covered step on the same surface. These observations qualitatively indicate that there is a variation in the elastic modulus over uncovered steps and no variation over covered ones. The quantitative results of the elastic modulus required the use of FMM, while the CR mode better highlighted areas of reduced elastic modulus (although it was difficult to convert the data into a quantifiable modulus). In the FMM measurements, single atomic steps of graphene with uncovered step edges showed a decrease in the elastic modulus of approximately 0.5%, which is compared with no change in the elastic modulus for covered steps. The analysis of the experimental data taken under varying normal loads and with several different tips showed that the elastic modulus determination was unaffected by these parameters.

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)0.000
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 score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.254
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