MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Development of a Low-Cost Surface Characterization Prototype for Solid and Liquid Samples

2025· article· W7161199852 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nelson Cisneros, Jorge Cuadra, Carlos Rudamas

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicSurface Roughness and Optical Measurements
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsCharacterization (materials science)Surface (topology)Development (topology)Component (thermodynamics)Deposition (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atomic force microscopy (AFM) and electron microscopy (EM) are widely used for solid surface characterization at micro and nano scale, but their high cost, operational maintenance, and sometimes destructive nature limit accessibility, especially in resource-constrained environments. These limitations highlight the need for affordable, portable, and easy to maintain alternatives. Moreover, liquid sample surface analysis is also an emerging necessity in fields like water quality assessments and studies. Optical techniques combined with image-based analysis offer accurate measurements without the high costs of AFM or EM. By enabling reflectance-based imaging, such systems can also support environmental monitoring, providing non-invasive, quantitative analysis of pollutants. In this work, we present a low-cost optical prototype for surface characterization based on Fresnel interference analysis. The system integrates a diode laser, a CCD sensor, and an automated XY scanning platform to perform multi-angle reflectance measurements. The proposed non-invasive method was experimentally validated on TiO<inf xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</inf> thin films, and its potential application for monitoring contaminants in water bodies is discussed.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.242 · 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.

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSurface Roughness and Optical MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207