MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3029261949 · doi:10.1017/s1431927620001531

Secondary Fluorescence of 3D Heterogeneous Materials Using a Hybrid Model

2020· article· en· W3029261949 on OpenAlexaff
Yu Yuan, Hendrix Demers, Xianglong Wang, Raynald Gauvin

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroscopy and Microanalysis · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodX-ray fluorescenceVoxelStatistical physicsDynamic Monte Carlo methodHybrid Monte CarloSecondary electronsDiffusionComputational physicsCharacterization (materials science)Materials scienceElectronPhysicsComputer scienceFluorescenceOpticsMathematicsThermodynamicsNuclear physicsStatisticsArtificial intelligenceMarkov chain Monte Carlo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In electron probe microanalysis or scanning electron microscopy, the Monte Carlo method is widely used for modeling electron transport within specimens and calculating X-ray spectra. For an accurate simulation, the calculation of secondary fluorescence (SF) is necessary, especially for samples with complex geometries. In this study, we developed a program, using a hybrid model that combines the Monte Carlo simulation with an analytical model, to perform SF correction for three-dimensional (3D) heterogeneous materials. The Monte Carlo simulation is performed using MC X-ray, a Monte Carlo program, to obtain the 3D primary X-ray distribution, which becomes the input of the analytical model. The voxel-based calculation of MC X-ray enables the model to be applicable to arbitrary samples. We demonstrate the derivation of the analytical model in detail and present the 3D X-ray distributions for both primary and secondary fluorescence to illustrate the capability of our program. Examples for non-diffusion couples and spherical inclusions inside matrices are shown. The results of our program are compared with experimental data from references and with results from other Monte Carlo codes. They are found to be in good agreement.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicroscopy and MicroanalysisSame topicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207