Analyzing k · p modeling in highly mismatched alloys and other III–V semiconductors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This Tutorial provides a comprehensive overview of various k⋅p models used to describe the electronic band structures of semiconductors with cubic diamond and zinc blende symmetries. Our primary focus is on III–V semiconductors, with a particular emphasis on highly mismatched alloys. We begin our exploration with the six-band k⋅p model, which effectively captures interactions within the highest valence bands. Following that, we delve into the intricacies of the eight-band k⋅p model, which takes into account strain effects and modifications to energy dispersion. The Tutorial also introduces the band anticrossing model and its corresponding ten-band k⋅p models, specifically tailored for dilute nitride semiconductors. Furthermore, we extend our discussion to the valence band anticrossing model and its application to the 14-band k⋅p model in the context of dilute bismide materials. Additionally, we emphasize the significance of more comprehensive models, exemplified by the 30-band k⋅p model, for faithfully representing the entire Brillouin zone.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".