MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230804433 · doi:10.1002/smll.200500276

Silicon Nanotubes

2005· review· en· W4230804433 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSmall · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon Nanotubes in Composites
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsCarbon nanotubeMaterials scienceNanotechnologySiliconElectronicsPerpendicularOptoelectronicsEngineeringElectrical engineeringGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New Si units! Only very recently has it been shown that it is possible to prepare nanotubes from silicon. The impact of such materials could be enormous in, amongst other fields, the electronics industry. Initial studies have shown that there is some complexity in understanding these materials and some diversity from their carbon-based cousins (the image shows various possible nanotubes, viewed parallel and perpendicular to the plane of the page).

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.005

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.265 · 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