MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413810739 · doi:10.1093/mam/ozaf076

Practical Considerations for Crystallographic and Microstructure Mapping With Direct Electron Detector-Based Electron Backscatter Diffraction

2025· article· en· W4413810739 on OpenAlexafffund
Tianbi Zhang, Ruth Birch, Graeme J. Francolini, Ebru Karakurt Uluscu, T. Ben Britton

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroscopy and Microanalysis · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsElectron backscatter diffractionMaterials scienceSilicon carbideSiliconElectron diffractionOptoelectronicsMicrostructureOpticsDiffractionMetallurgyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Compact direct electron detectors are becoming increasingly popular in electron microscopy applications including electron backscatter diffraction, as they offer an opportunity for low cost and accessible microstructural analysis. In this work, we explore how one of these commercial devices based on the Timepix chip can be optimized to obtain high-quality data quickly and easily, through careful systematic analysis of a variety of samples, including: semiconductor silicon, commercially pure nickel, a dual phase titanium-molybdenum alloy, and a silicon carbide ceramic matrix composite. Our findings provide strategies for very fast collection of orientation maps, including at low voltage (5-10 keV) and low beam current conditions. Additionally, strategies for collection of very high-quality EBSD patterns are demonstrated that have significant potential for advanced EBSD applications (e.g., elastic strain mapping).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicroscopy and MicroanalysisSame topicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207