Nanopore Formation via Tip‐Controlled Local Breakdown Using an Atomic Force Microscope
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The dielectric breakdown approach for forming nanopores has greatly accelerated the pace of research in solid‐state nanopore sensing, enabling inexpensive formation of nanopores via a bench top setup. Here the potential of tip‐controlled local breakdown (TCLB) to fabricate pores 100× faster, with high scalability and nanometer positioning precision using an atomic force microscope (AFM) is demonstrated. A conductive AFM tip is brought into contact with a silicon nitride membrane positioned above an electrolyte reservoir. Application of a voltage pulse at the tip leads to the formation of a single nanoscale pore. Pores are formed precisely at the tip position with a complete suppression of multiple pore formation. In addition, the approach greatly accelerates the electric breakdown process, leading to an average pore fabrication time on the order of 10 ms, at least two orders of magnitude shorter than achieved by classic dielectric breakdown approaches. With this fast pore writing speed over 300 pores can be fabricated in half an hour on the same membrane.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".