Microscopic Characteristics of Kinking Phenomenon in Vertically Free-Standing Nanowires
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vertically free-standing nanowires, synthesized through vapor-based growth, can undergo changes in their growth directions known as kinking. These alterations can significantly influence the physical and chemical properties of nanowires, thereby expanding their potential applications. The occurrence of kinks is commonly associated with variations in vapor, temperature, seed, and/or their combinations. However, the interplay among different growth factors complicates the identification of the dominating factor and, consequently, limits precise control over nanowire morphology. Theoretical models, incorporating factors like supersaturation, wetting angle, nanowire size, and surface/interface energies tied to growth conditions, have been developed to describe and predict kinking during nanowire growth. While a few pivotal parameters, such as surface/interface energies and wetting angles, can be subtly adjusted through minor alterations in growth conditions, accurately predicting the occurrence of kinks remains a practical challenge. Conversely, in the present review, we attempted to elucidate connections between microscopic aspects, such as changes in composition and the formation of defects, and the nucleation and progression of kinks. This effort aims to construct a predictive framework that enhances our understanding of the tendencies in nanowire growth.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it