MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967835363 · doi:10.1063/1.2710263

Molecular dynamics methodology to investigate steady-state heterogeneous crystal growth

2007· article· en· W1967835363 on OpenAlexaff
Jenel Vatamanu, Peter G. Kusalik

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicnanoparticles nucleation surface interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupercoolingSteady state (chemistry)Crystal (programming language)Crystal growthThermodynamicsGrowth rateMolecular dynamicsMaterials scienceCrystallizationChemical physicsChemistryPhysical chemistryPhysicsComputer scienceComputational chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper a new molecular dynamics simulation methodology to investigate steady-state heterogeneous crystal growth from a supercooled liquid is presented. The method is tested on pure component systems such as Lennard-Jonesium and water/ice, as well as multicomponent systems such as methane hydrate crystals. The setup uses periodicity in all three directions and two interfaces; at one interface, crystallization occurs, while at the other, melting is enforced by locally heating the crystal only near that interface. Steady-state conditions are achieved when the crystal is melted at the same rate as the growth occurs. A self-adaptive scheme that automatically modifies the rate of melting to match the rate of growth, crucial for establishing steady-state conditions, is described. In contrast with the recently developed method of Razul et al. [Mol. Phys. 103, 1929 (2005)], where the rates of growth (melting) were constant and the temperatures determined, the present approach fixes the supercooling temperature at the growing interface and identifies the corresponding steady-state crystal growth rate that corresponds to the thermodynamic force provided. The static properties of the interface (e.g., the interfacial widths) and the kinetics of the crystal growth are found to reproduce well previous findings. The importance of establishing steady-state conditions in such investigations is also briefly discussed.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations66
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicnanoparticles nucleation surface interactionsFrench-language works237,207