MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380635208 · doi:10.1109/ted.2023.3279812

On the Existence of Negative Capacitance: Examining Ferroelectric-Dielectric Stack Experiments Using the NLS and LK Models

2023· article· en· W4380635208 on OpenAlexafffund
Thomas Cam, J. A. Byers, Ji Kai Wang, Collin VanEssen, Prasad S. Gudem, Diego Kienle, Mani Vaidyanathan

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Electron Devices · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFerroelectric and Negative Capacitance Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFerroelectricityCapacitanceDielectricStack (abstract data type)VoltageNegative impedance converterPhysicsHysteresisStatistical physicsCondensed matter physicsComputer scienceOptoelectronicsQuantum mechanicsVoltage source

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Landau–Khalatnikov (LK) model of ferroelectric switching includes an inherent region of negative capacitance (NC) in its lossless charge versus voltage description and allows the possibility of stabilization of the ferroelectric in this region to achieve quasi-static NC (QSNC). On the other hand, the nucleation-limited switching (NLS) model, which is another model used to describe ferroelectric switching, precludes QSNC and offers an alternative explanation for the appearance of an NC region in recent voltage-pulse experiments performed on ferroelectric-dielectric (FE-DE) stacks. As such, we investigate such experiments that probe the existence of an NC region using both the LK and NLS models. While the LK model can reproduce all experimental results seen in prior literature, we find that the NLS model is incapable of properly reproducing results under a multitude of investigation metrics. Hence, we conclude that the use of the NLS model to exclude the existence of QSNC is problematic.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Electron DevicesSame topicFerroelectric and Negative Capacitance DevicesFrench-language works237,207