Geometry-tailored freestanding epitaxial Pd, AuPd, and Au nanoplates driven by surface interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Freestanding epitaxial metal nanoplates can be utilized as advanced three-dimensional platforms for various novel applications. Here we report the vapor-phase epitaxial growth of freestanding Pd, AuPd, and Au nanoplates on an a-cut sapphire substrate as well as the comprehensive study of their growth mechanisms and geometry tailoring. All as-grown Pd, AuPd, and Au nanoplates possess twin-free single crystallinity as well as are aligned three-dimensionally on the substrate with the same orientation. Interestingly, depending on their composition, they have the following three distinct geometries: trapezoid (Pd), hexagon (AuPd), or rhombus (Au). By analyzing the correlation of the geometry and orientation of the as-synthesized nanostructures, we reveal that all the nanoplates grow from square pyramidal seed crystals. The interfacial lattice mismatch between the bottom plane of the square pyramidal seeds and a-cut sapphire substrate increases in the following order: Pd < AuPd < Au. Consequently, the length of the interface between the bottom of the nanoplate and the substrate decreases in the following order: Pd > AuPd > Au; this leads to the resulting geometries of the synthesized nanoplates. Such a fundamental understanding of the growth mechanism would aid the growth of epitaxial metal nanostructures with the desired geometry, which is very attractive for building macroscale functional nanoarchitectures.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".