MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980049126 · doi:10.1002/adfm.201903770

Atomic‐Scale Manipulation and In Situ Characterization with Scanning Tunneling Microscopy

2019· article· en· W2980049126 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Functional Materials · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSurface and Thin Film Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsCharacterization (materials science)Mesoscopic physicsScanning tunneling microscopeLithographyQuantum dotNanowireQuantum tunnellingIn situQuantum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Scanning tunneling microscope (STM) has presented a revolutionary methodology to nanoscience and nanotechnology. It enables imaging of the topography of surfaces, mapping the distribution of electronic density of states, and manipulating individual atoms and molecules, all at atomic resolutions. In particular, atom manipulation capability has evolved from fabricating individual nanostructures toward the scalable production of the atomic‐sized devices bottom‐up. The combination of precision synthesis and in situ characterization has enabled direct visualization of many quantum phenomena and fast proof‐of‐principle testing of quantum device functions with immediate feedback to guide improved synthesis. Several representative examples are reviewed to demonstrate the recent development of atomic‐scale manipulation, focusing on progress that addresses quantum properties by design in several technologically relevant materials systems. Integration of several atomically precisely controlled probes in a multiprobe STM system vastly extends the capability of in situ characterization to a new dimension where the charge and spin transport behaviors can be examined from mesoscopic to atomic length scale. The automation of atomic‐scale manipulation and the integration with well‐established lithographic processes further push this bottom‐up approach to a new level that combines reproducible fabrication, extraordinary programmability, and the ability to produce large‐scale arrays of quantum structures.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations59
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Functional MaterialsSame topicSurface and Thin Film PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207