MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206078655 · doi:10.1063/5.0080133

The formation of a one-dimensional van der Waals selenium crystal from the three-dimensional amorphous phase: A spectroscopic signature of van der Waals bonding

2022· article· en· W4206078655 on OpenAlexaff
Miloš Krbal, Alexander V. Kolobov, Paul Fons, Yuta Saito, George Belev, Safa Kasap

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPhase-change materials and chalcogenides
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersRussian Foundation for Basic ResearchJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceGrantová Agentura České RepublikyMinisterstvo Školství, Mládeže a Tělovýchovy
Keywordsvan der Waals forceVan der Waals strainCovalent bondCrystallographyChemical physicsCrystallizationCrystal (programming language)Absorption spectroscopyChemistryAmorphous solidAbsorption (acoustics)Van der Waals radiusPhase (matter)Materials scienceMoleculePhysicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trigonal selenium is a prototypical one-dimensional (1D) van der Waals (vdW) solid, where covalently bonded helical chains are held together by weaker vdW forces. In this work, we have studied structural transformation from a three-dimensional amorphous phase of non-interacting Se chains into a 1D vdW crystal using x-ray absorption spectroscopy. The crystallization process and establishment of vdW interaction are accompanied by elongation and weakening of covalent Se-Se bonds. We have found a unique signature in the x-ray absorption near-edge structure spectrum that is associated with vdW bonds and can be used to identify the formation of the latter. We believe that a similar approach can be used to study other 1D vdW solids, such as transition-metal trichalcogenides, and particularly stress the usefulness of x-ray absorption spectroscopy to identify vdW bonds.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.798

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics LettersSame topicPhase-change materials and chalcogenidesFrench-language works237,207