A novel electrospinning target to improve the yield of uniaxially aligned fibers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electrospinning is a useful technique that can generate micro and nanometer-sized fibers. Modification of the electrospinning parameters, such as deposition target geometry, can generate uniaxially aligned fibers for use in diverse applications ranging from tissue engineering to material fabrication. For example, meshes of fibers have been shown to mimic the extracellular matrix networks for use in smooth muscle cell proliferation. Further, aligned fibers can guide neurites to grow along the direction of the fibers. Here we present a novel electrospinning deposition target that combines the benefits of two previously reported electrodes: the standard parallel electrodes and the spinning wheel with a sharpened edge. This new target design significantly improves aligned fiber yield. Specifically, the target consists of two parallel aluminum plates with sharpened edges containing a bifurcating angle of 26 degrees. Electric field computations show a larger probable area of aligned electric field vectors. This new deposition target allows fibers to deposit on a larger cross-sectional area relative to the existing parallel electrode and at least doubles the yield of uniaxially aligned fibers. Further, fiber alignment and morphology are preserved after collection from the deposition target.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it