MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117584399 · doi:10.1002/adom.202502992

Quantum Emission in Monolayer WSe <sub>2</sub> Transferred onto InP Nanowires

2025· article· en· W7117584399 on OpenAlexafffund
Palwinder Singh, Jasleen Kaur Jagde, Megha Jain, Edith Yeung, David B. Northeast, S. Moisa, Seid J. Mohammed, Jean Lapointe, Una Rajnis, Annika Kienast, Philip J. Poole, Dan Dalacu, Kimberley C. Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Optical Materials · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
Topic2D Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of OttawaDalhousie University
FundersNational Research Council CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMonolayerNanowirePhotonicsPhotoluminescenceLight emissionQuantumPhoton antibunchingPhoton

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Localized quantum emitters in transition‐metal dichalcogenides (TMDs) have recently emerged as solid‐state candidates for on‐demand sources of single photons. Due to the role of strain in the site‐selective creation of TMD emitters, their hybrid integration into photonic structures such as cavities and waveguides is possible using pick‐and‐place methods. Here, quantum emission from a hybrid structure consisting of a monolayer of WSe 2 interfaced with horizontally aligned InP nanowires (NWs) is investigated. These experiments reveal multiple narrow and bright emission peaks in the 715–785 nm spectral range and g (2) (0) as low as 0.049, indicating strong antibunching and good single photon purity. The well‐defined facets of the InP NWs shape the local strain landscape, enabling controlled formation of localized emitters in the WSe 2 monolayer.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.259 · 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
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Optical MaterialsSame topic2D Materials and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207