MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402391526 · doi:10.1021/acsnano.4c10827

Unmasking Fluorinated Moieties on the Surface of Hydride-Terminated Silicon Nanoparticles

2024· article· en· W4402391526 on OpenAlexafffund
Brayden Glockzin, Kevin O’Connor, Chuyi Ni, Cole Butler, Jonathan G. C. Veinot, Vladimir K. Michaelis

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Nano · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSilicon Nanostructures and Photoluminescence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersTechnische Universität MünchenNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsCanada Foundation for InnovationUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsHydrideMaterials scienceNanoparticleSiliconNanotechnologySurface modificationChemical engineeringOptoelectronicsMetal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the widespread use of hydrofluoric acid (HF) in the preparation of silicon surfaces, the true nature of fluorinated surface species remains unclear. Here, we employ an array of characterization techniques led by solid-state nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy to uncover the nature of fluorinated moieties on the surface of hydride-terminated silicon nanoparticles (H-SiNPs). A structural model that explains the observed trends in 19 F and 29 Si magnetic shielding is proposed and further supported by quantum chemical computations. Fluorine is incorporated into local oxidation domains on the surface and clustered at the interface of the oxide and surrounding hydride-terminated surface. Silicon sites capped by a single fluorine are also identified by their distinct 19 F and 29 Si chemical shifts, providing insight into how fluorine termination influences the electronic structure. The extent of fluorine passivation and the effects of fluorine on the optical properties of SiNPs are also discussed. Finally, challenges associated with Teflon contamination are highlighted that future explorations of nanomaterials may have to contend with.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.552

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS NanoSame topicSilicon Nanostructures and PhotoluminescenceFrench-language works237,207