Field Emission Characteristics of InSb Patterned Nanowires
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract InSb nanowire arrays with different geometrical parameters, diameter and pitch, are fabricated by a top‐down etching process on Si(100) substrates. Field emission properties of InSb nanowires are investigated by using a nano‐manipulated tip anode inside of a scanning electron microscope. Stable field emission current is reported, with a maximum intensity extracted from a single nanowire of 1 µA, corresponding to a current density as high as 104 A cm−2. Stability and robustness of the nanowire is probed by monitoring field emission current for about 3 h. By tuning the cathode‐anode distance in the range 500–1300 nm, the field enhancement factor and the turn‐on field exhibit non‐monotonic dependence, with maximum enhancement β ≈ 78 and minimum turn‐on field EON ≈ 0.033 V nm−1 for a separation d = 900 nm. The reduction of pitch between nanowires and the increase of diameter cause the reduction of the field emission performance, with reduced field enhancement (β < 60) and increased turn‐on field (EON ≈ 0.050 V nm−1). Finally, finite element simulation of the electric field distribution in the system demonstrates that emission is limited to an effective area near the border of the nanowire top surface, with annular shape and maximum width of 10 nm.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".