An apparatus based on an atomic force microscope for implementing tip-controlled local breakdown
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solid-state nanopores are powerful tools for sensing of single biomolecules in solution. Fabrication of solid-state nanopores is still challenging, however; in particular, new methods are needed to facilitate the integration of pores with larger nanofluidic and electronic device architectures. We have developed the tip-controlled local breakdown (TCLB) approach, in which an atomic force microscope (AFM) tip is brought into contact with a silicon nitride membrane that is placed onto an electrolyte reservoir. The application of a voltage bias at the AFM tip induces a dielectric breakdown that leads to the formation of a nanopore at the tip position. In this work, we report on the details of the apparatus used to fabricate nanopores using the TCLB method, and we demonstrate the formation of nanopores with smaller, more controlled diameters using a current limiting circuit that zeroes the voltage upon pore formation. Additionally, we demonstrate the capability of TCLB to fabricate pores aligned to embedded topographical features on the membranes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".