MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025310130 · doi:10.1149/ma2020-0113955mtgabs

(Invited) Optical Characterization of Nanomaterial By Means of Hyperspectral Global Imaging

2020· article· en· W3025310130 on OpenAlexaff
Laura‐Isabelle Dion‐Bertrand, Richard Martel, Daniel A. Heller

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsRegroupement Québécois sur les Matériaux de PointePhoton Etc (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperspectral imagingChemical imagingMaterials scienceGrapheneCharacterization (materials science)Raman spectroscopyCarbon nanotubeNanomaterialsNanotechnologyRaman scatteringPhotoluminescenceOpticsOptoelectronicsComputer sciencePhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fluorescence and Raman spectroscopy are powerful techniques to probe the intrinsic properties of low dimensional materials such as carbon nanotubes and graphene. In this study, we present how a hyperspectral imaging platform based on Bragg gratings designed for global imaging can help improve the fabrication methods of various nanomaterials. Spectrally and spatially resolved maps were acquired on different samples over a million points. The intrinsic specificity of Raman scattering combined with the analysis performed by the global imaging modality makes it a useful method to assess large maps (hundreds of microns) of the spatial distribution of defects, number of layers and stacking order. On the other hand, hyperspectral photoluminescence provides straightforward information on photostability and allows multiplexing. This presentation will highlight how hyperspectral microscopy can be used to study carbon nanotubes based fluorophores, CVD graphene and MoS2.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.009

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207