X‐ray spectroscopy and quantification of an <scp>AlCuLi</scp> quasi‐crystal: A step forward for combination of reflection zone plate and crystal spectrometers
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
Abstract We present the analysis of an AlCuLi quasi‐crystal on an electron probe microanalyser equipped with spectrometers working both in the soft and ultra‐soft x‐ray ranges. This original combination enables obtaining the Li Kα and Al L 2,3 emissions with a reflection plate spectrometer and the Al Kβ and Cu Lα emissions with a curved‐crystal spectrometer. All these emissions are emission bands, sensitive to the chemical state of the emitting element. From the observation of the valence band shapes, it is confirmed that the electronic structure of the quasi‐crystal is quite different from that of the corresponding pure metals. From the measured intensities, quantification is performed using the PAP model. The weight fractions calculated from the ultra‐soft x‐ray emission intensities are very dependent on the chosen database of mass attenuation coefficients. Comparison with fractions calculated with small uncertainty in the soft x‐ray range enables choosing which databases are the most relevant for the ultra‐soft x‐ray range. Both quantifications performed from ultra‐soft and soft x‐ray emissions are compatible, leading to the Al 60 Cu 24 Li 16 weight concentration of the quasi‐crystal.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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