Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 171

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Quantitative analysis of lateral force microscopy experiments

Schwarz, U. D., Köster, P., Wiesendanger, R.·1996·Review of Scientific Instruments

Abstract

The analysis of lateral force microscopy experiments is discussed with emphasis on calibration issues and the statistical treatment of the original data in order to obtain reliable quantitative results. This includes an extensive discussion about the statistical and systematical errors which have to be considered if experimental results obtained under different experimental conditions (such as different cantilevers, samples, humidities, with or without lubricant, etc.) have to be compared. The proposed data analysis procedure is exemplified using data acquired on germanium sulfide and highly oriented pyrolytic graphite.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1063/1.1147214

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 171

Metadata

Authors
Schwarz, U. D., Köster, P., & Wiesendanger, R.
Venue
Review of Scientific Instruments
Published
1996-07-01
Volume
67
Issue
7
Pages
2560-2567
ISSN
  • 0034-6748 (ISSN-L)
  • 1089-7623
OpenAlex
W2021397997
Cited by
171
References
0
FWCI
4.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quantitative analysis of lateral force microscopy experiments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1063/1.1147214
The paper
Schwarz, U. D., Köster, P., & Wiesendanger, R. (1996). Quantitative analysis of lateral force microscopy experiments. Review of Scientific Instruments. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1147214

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.