MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092391161 · doi:10.1088/1361-6528/abc0c8

Graphene field effect transistor scaling for ultra-low-noise sensors

2020· article· en· W3092391161 on OpenAlexafffund
Ngoc Anh Minh Tran, Ibrahim Fakih, Oliver Durnan, Anjun Hu, Ayşe Melis Aygar, Ilargi Napal, Alba Centeno, Amaia Zurutuza, Bertrand Reulet, Thomas Szkopek

Bibliographic record

VenueNanotechnology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphene research and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsGrapheneMaterials scienceField-effect transistorNoise (video)TransistorScalingOptoelectronicsResolution (logic)NanotechnologyPhysicsVoltageComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The discovery of the field effect in graphene initiated the development of graphene field effect transistor (FET) sensors, wherein high mobility surface conduction is readily modulated by surface adsorption. For all graphene transistor sensors, low-frequency 1/ f noise determines sensor resolution, and the absolute measure of 1/ f noise is thus a crucial performance metric for sensor applications. Here we report a simple method for reducing 1/ f noise by scaling the active area of graphene FET sensors. We measured 1/ f noise in graphene FETs with size 5 μ m × 5 μ m to 5.12 mm × 5.12 mm, observing more than five orders of magnitude reduction in 1/ f noise. We report the lowest normalized graphene 1/ f noise parameter observed to date, 5 × 10 −13 , and we demonstrate a sulfate ion sensor with a record resolution of 1.2 × 10 −3 log molar concentration units. Our work highlights the importance of area scaling in graphene FET sensor design, wherein increased channel area improves sensor resolution.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.253 · 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.

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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNanotechnologySame topicGraphene research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207