MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283382681 · doi:10.1063/5.0098045

Optimization of growth parameters to obtain epitaxial large area growth of molybdenum disulfide using pulsed laser deposition

2022· article· en· W4283382681 on OpenAlexafffund
Dhanvini Gudi, Payel Sen, Andres Alejandro Forero Pico, Dipanjan Nandi, Manisha Gupta

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP Advances · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
Topic2D Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCMC Microsystems
KeywordsMaterials scienceThin filmPulsed laser depositionMonolayerAnnealing (glass)Chemical vapor depositionMolybdenum disulfideEpitaxyOptoelectronicsChemical engineeringSubstrate (aquarium)Analytical Chemistry (journal)FluenceLayer (electronics)NanotechnologyLaserComposite materialOpticsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

2D transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDCs) are promising materials for device applications owing to their electronic, optical, and material properties varying with the number of monolayers. Synthesis of large area crystalline TMDC thin films is still challenging with techniques such as exfoliation and chemical vapor growth owing to the uncontrollability of deposition area and high temperature growths with toxic precursors, respectively. Pulsed laser deposition (PLD) is a technique that can overcome these challenges owing to stoichiometric layer by layer growth control by optimizing the growth parameters. In this study, we optimize parameters such as temperature, post-growth annealing, inert gas pressure, and substrate–target distance during PLD growth of MoS2 to obtain uniform and highly crystalline thin films on an ∼1 in.2 substrate. The optimized growth conditions are 800 °C with a 30 min post-growth annealing at a laser fluence of 2.2 J/cm2 with a substrate–target distance of 5 cm and 0.5 mTorr of argon partial pressure. An RMS roughness of 0.17 nm was obtained for 3 nm (4 monolayers) thick MoS2 films with a thin film conductivity of ∼4000 S/m.

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 score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP AdvancesSame topic2D Materials and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207