MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995557695 · doi:10.1063/5.0052126

Confronting interatomic force measurements

2021· preprint· en· W2995557695 on OpenAlexafffund
Omur E. Dagdeviren

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicForce Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureMcGill UniversityUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOscillation (cell signaling)AmplitudeInteratomic potentialPhysicsCantileverClassical mechanicsChemistryMolecular dynamicsMaterials scienceOpticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The quantitative interatomic force measurements open a new pathway to materials characterization, surface science, and chemistry by elucidating the tip-sample interaction forces. Atomic force microscopy is the ideal platform to gauge interatomic forces between the tip and the sample. For such quantitative measurements, either the oscillation frequency or the oscillation amplitude and the phase of a vibrating cantilever are recorded as a function of the tip-sample separation. These experimental quantities are subsequently converted into the tip-sample interaction force, which can be compared with interatomic force laws to reveal the governing physical phenomena. Recently, it has been shown that the most commonly applied mathematical conversion techniques may suffer a significant deviation from the actual tip-sample interaction forces. To avoid the assessment of unphysical interatomic forces, the use of either very small (i.e., a few picometers) or very large oscillation amplitudes (i.e., a few nanometers) has been proposed. However, the use of marginal oscillation amplitudes gives rise to another problem as it lacks the feasibility due to the adverse signal-to-noise ratios. Here, we show a new mathematical conversion principle that confronts interatomic force measurements while preserving the oscillation amplitude within the experimentally achievable and favorable limits, i.e., tens of picometers. Our theoretical calculations and complementary experimental results demonstrate that the proposed technique has three major advantages over existing methodologies: (I) eliminating mathematical instabilities of the reconstruction of tip-sample interaction force, (II) enabling accurate conversion deep into the repulsive regime of tip-sample interaction force, and (III) being robust to the uncertainty of the oscillation amplitude and the measurement noise. Due to these advantages, we anticipate that our methodology will be the nucleus of a reliable evaluation of material properties with a more accurate measurement of tip-sample interaction forces.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.658
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.287 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicForce Microscopy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207