Detection of Be dopant pairing in VLS grown GaAs nanowires with twinning superlattices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Control over the distribution of dopants in nanowires is essential for regulating their electronic properties, but perturbations in nanowire microstructure may affect doping. Conversely, dopants may be used to control nanowire microstructure including the generation of twinning superlattices (TSLs)-periodic arrays of twin planes. Here the spatial distribution of Be dopants in a GaAs nanowire with a TSL is investigated using atom probe tomography. Homogeneous dopant distributions in both the radial and axial directions are observed, indicating a decoupling of the dopant distribution from the nanowire microstructure. Although the dopant distribution is microscopically homogenous, radial distribution function analysis discovered that 1% of the Be atoms occur in substitutional-interstitial pairs. The pairing confirms theoretical predictions based on the low defect formation energy. These findings indicate that using dopants to engineer microstructure does not necessarily imply that the dopant distribution is non-uniform.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".