Comparison of the Elastic-Plastic Transition in Nanocrystalline Nickel Pillars Fabricated by Electron Beam Lithography and Focused Ion Beam Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The elastic-plastic transition or yield behaviour was observed during compression of nanocrystalline nickel pillars fabricated by electroplating into electron beam lithography (EBL) forms or by focused ion beam (FIB) milling of the same electroplated structure. The experimental methodology allowed structures with different surface defect source/obstacles and similar bulk defects to be compared. Pillars with 1 to 2 um diameter cross-sections were made with height to diameter aspect ratios from 2:1 to 6:1, grain size of 91 ± 23 nm, and <110>, <111>, <100> textures in the growth direction. The pillars were compressed under a flat punch at constant loading rates from 1.5 to 30 μΝ/s using an instrumented indenter. EBL pillars generally showed a gradual elastic-plastic transition similar to yielding in bulk nickel followed by strain bursts. In contrast, FIB-milled pillars consistently showed stochastic yielding. The Young’s modulus was 55 to 350 GPa for all pillars, agreeing with values in the literature. The yield stress at 0.2% offset strain for EBL pillars ranged from 480 to 1800 MPa, and 320 to 700 MPa for FIB-milled pillars that was narrowed to 550 to 650 MPa after subsequent annealing, with initial deformation localized near the tops of FIB-milled pillars due to geometrical tapering. EBL pillar shear yield strengths exceed the literature reported for Ni and appear to lose their size dependence.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".