MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1895464398 · doi:10.1039/c4fd00245h

Changing the magnetic properties of microstructure by directing the self-assembly of superparamagnetic nanoparticles

2014· article· en· W1895464398 on OpenAlexaff
Suvojit Ghosh, Ishwar K. Puri

Bibliographic record

VenueFaraday Discussions · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCharacterization and Applications of Magnetic Nanoparticles
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuperparamagnetismMagnetizationMaterials scienceMagnetic nanoparticlesNanotechnologyCondensed matter physicsNanoparticleMagnetMagnetization dynamicsMagnetic fieldMagnetic momentParticle (ecology)Chemical physicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs) in a liquid dispersion can be organized through controlled self-assembly by applying an external magnetic field that regulates inter-particle interactions. Thus, micro- and nanostructures of desired morphology and superlattice geometry that show emergent magnetic properties can be fabricated. We describe how superferromagnetism, which is a specific type of emergence, can be produced. Here, superparamagnetic nanoparticles that show no individual residual magnetization are organized into structures with substantial residual magnetization that behave as miniature permanent magnets. We investigate the emergence of superferromagnetism in an idealized system consisting of two MNPs, by considering the influence that interparticle magnetostatic interactions have on the dynamics of the magnetic moments. We use this model to illustrate the design principles for self-assembly in terms of the choice of material and MNP particle size. We simulate the dynamics of the interacting magnetic moments by applying the stochastic Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation to verify our principles. The findings enable a method to pattern material magnetization with submicron resolution, a useful feature that has potential applications for magnetic recording and microfluidic particle traps. The analysis also yields useful empirical generalizations that could facilitate other theoretical developments.

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 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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.266

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFaraday DiscussionsSame topicCharacterization and Applications of Magnetic NanoparticlesFrench-language works237,207