MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401698137 · doi:10.1149/ma2024-01221330mtgabs

(Invited) Ultrathin Gap Nanoantenna: Crystal Phase Transitions and Luminescent Properties

2024· article· en· W4401698137 on OpenAlexaff
Ray LaPierre, Ethan Diak

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhotonic Crystals and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLuminescenceMaterials scienceOptoelectronicsPhase transitionPhase (matter)Crystal (programming language)NanotechnologyChemistryCondensed matter physicsPhysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report Te-doped GaP nanowires (NWs) with positive tapering and radii measuring as low as 5 nm grown by the self-assisted vapor-liquid-solid mechanism using selective-area molecular beam epitaxy. The occurrence of the ultrathin nanoantenna showed a dependence on pattern pitch (separation between NWs) with a predominance at 600 nm pitch, and exhibited radius oscillations that correlate with polytypic zincblende/wurtzite segments. A growth model explains the positive tapering of the NW leading to an ultrathin tip from the suppression of surface diffusion of Ga adatoms on the NW sidewalls by Te dopant flux. The model also provides a relationship between the radius modulations and the oscillations of the droplet contact angle, predicting the quasi-periodic radius oscillations and corresponding crystal phase transitions. The GaP NWs showed strong low temperature micro-photoluminescence exciton-related emission, indicating a bandgap difference between the zincblende/wurtzite segments, with phonon replicas due to the transverse optical phonon mode. These results establish a link between dopants and the ability to control NW morphology, crystal phase and luminescent properties with possible applications in thermoelectrics, quantum emitters and photodetectors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score0.580

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicPhotonic Crystals and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207