MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1221289856 · doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.5b02173

Strengthening in Graphene Oxide Nanosheets: Bridging the Gap between Interplanar and Intraplanar Fracture

2015· article· en· W1221289856 on OpenAlexafffund
Changhong Cao, Matthew Daly, Brandon Chen, Jane Y. Howe, Chandra Veer Singh, Tobin Filleter, Yu Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueNano Letters · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphene research and applications
Canadian institutionsHitachi (Canada)University of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsMaterials scienceNanosheetGrapheneMonolayerUltimate tensile strengthBrittlenessOxideComposite materialFracture (geology)Bridging (networking)NanotechnologyMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graphene oxide (GO) is a layered material comprised of hierarchical features which possess vastly differing characteristic dimensions. GO nanosheets represent the critical hierarchical structure which bridges the length-scale of monolayer and bulk material architectures. In this study, the strength and fracture behavior of GO nanosheets were examined. Under uniaxial loading, the tensile strength of the nanosheets was measured to be as high as 12 ± 4 GPa, which approaches the intrinsic strength of monolayer GO and is orders of magnitude higher than that of bulk GO materials. During mechanical failure, brittle fracture was observed in a highly localized region through the cross-section of the nanosheets without interlayer pull-out. This transition in the failure behavior from interplanar fracture, common for bulk GO, to intraplanar fracture, which dominates failure in monolayer GO, is responsible for the high strength measured in the nanosheets. Molecular dynamics simulations indicate that the elastic release from the propagation of intraplanar cracks initiates global fracture due to interlayer load transmission through hydrogen bond networks within the gallery space of the GO nanosheets. Furthermore, the GO nanosheet strength and stiffness were found to be strongly correlated to the effective volume and thickness of the samples, respectively. These findings help to bridge the understanding of the mechanical behavior of hierarchical GO materials and will ultimately guide the application of this intermediate scale material.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.386

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.246 · 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.

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

Citations74
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNano LettersSame topicGraphene research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207