MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1563543885 · doi:10.5772/19139

Defected and Substitutionally Doped Nanotubes: Applications in Biosystems, Sensors, Nanoelectronics, and Catalysis

2011· book-chapter· en· W1563543885 on OpenAlexafffund
Charles See, 亜夏爾 亜力坤, Yan Alexander

Bibliographic record

VenueInTech eBooks · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon Nanotubes in Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWestern Canada Research Grid
KeywordsNanoelectronicsCarbon nanotubeMaterials scienceChirality (physics)NanotechnologyNanotubeNanomaterialsZigzagGrapheneNanomechanicsSupramolecular chemistryBand gapCrystal structureCrystallographyPhysicsOptoelectronicsChemistryQuantum mechanicsAtomic force microscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oshiyama 2006; Ajayan 1998). Different from point vacancies, other structural defects arising from geometric rearrangements may also be present in nanotube sidewalls. The simplest of these rearrangements is the pentagon-heptagon defect in which a single C-C bond positioned between two adjacent hexagon rings undergoes a simple bond rotation, resulting in the formation of two non-hexagonal rings. Pentagon-heptagon defects have minimal effect on the local environment of the nanotube but induce a global buckling of the macromolecule, leading to significant changes in conductivity and aggregation (Chico 2010; Sonia & Niranjan 2010). Of note, two adjacent pentagon-heptagon defects can form a pentagonal-heptagonal-heptagonal-pentagonal (5775) structure known also as the Stone-Wales (SW) defect (Stone & Wales 1986).

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInTech eBooksSame topicCarbon Nanotubes in CompositesFrench-language works237,207