AstroECP: towards more practical Electron Channeling Contrast Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electron channeling contrast imaging (ECCI) is a scanning electron microscopy (SEM) based technique that enables bulk-sample characterization of crystallographic defects (e.g. dislocations, stacking faults, low angle boundaries). Despite its potential, ECCI remains underused for quantitative defect analysis as compared to transmission electron microscope (TEM) based methods. Here, we overcome barriers that limit the use of ECCI including optimizing signal-to-noise contrast, precise determination of the incident beam vector with calibrated and easy to use simulations and experimental selected area electron channeling patterns (SA-ECP). We introduce a systematic ECCI workflow, alongside a new open-source software tool (AstroECP), that includes calibration of stage tilting, SA-ECP field of view, and the energy that forms the ECP/ECCI contrast using dynamical simulations. The functionality of this workflow is demonstrated with case studies that include threading dislocations in GaAs and the cross validation of precession based ECCI-contrast, which is otherwise known as Electron Channeling Orientation Determination (eCHORD). To assist the reader, we also provide best practice guidelines for ECCI implementation to promote high-resolution defect imaging in the SEM.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".