MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138261604 · doi:10.1017/s1431927621011946

Fast Grain Mapping with Sub-Nanometer Resolution Using 4D-STEM with Grain Classification by Principal Component Analysis and Non-Negative Matrix Factorization

2021· article· en· W3138261604 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroscopy and Microanalysis · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Electron Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsDow Chemical (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrincipal component analysisPattern recognition (psychology)Image resolutionFeature (linguistics)Resolution (logic)Non-negative matrix factorizationMatrix (chemical analysis)Diffraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-throughput grain mapping with sub-nanometer spatial resolution is demonstrated using scanning nanobeam electron diffraction (also known as 4D scanning transmission electron microscopy, or 4D-STEM) combined with high-speed direct-electron detection. An electron probe size down to 0.5 nm in diameter is used and the sample investigated is a gold–palladium nanoparticle catalyst. Computational analysis of the 4D-STEM data sets is performed using a disk registration algorithm to identify the diffraction peaks followed by feature learning to map the individual grains. Two unsupervised feature learning techniques are compared: principal component analysis (PCA) and non-negative matrix factorization (NNMF). The characteristics of the PCA versus NNMF output are compared and the potential of the 4D-STEM approach for statistical analysis of grain orientations at high spatial resolution is discussed.

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.

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 score0.418
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.273 · 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