A Graphene-Based Resistive Pressure Sensor with Record-High Sensitivity in a Wide Pressure Range
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pressure sensors are a key component in electronic skin (e-skin) sensing systems. Most reported resistive pressure sensors have a high sensitivity at low pressures (<5 kPa) to enable ultra-sensitive detection. However, the sensitivity drops significantly at high pressures (>5 kPa), which is inadequate for practical applications. For example, actions like a gentle touch and object manipulation have pressures below 10 kPa, and 10-100 kPa, respectively. Maintaining a high sensitivity in a wide pressure range is in great demand. Here, a flexible, wide range and ultra-sensitive resistive pressure sensor with a foam-like structure based on laser-scribed graphene (LSG) is demonstrated. Benefitting from the large spacing between graphene layers and the unique v-shaped microstructure of the LSG, the sensitivity of the pressure sensor is as high as 0.96 kPa(-1) in a wide pressure range (0 ~ 50 kPa). Considering both sensitivity and pressure sensing range, the pressure sensor developed in this work is the best among all reported pressure sensors to date. A model of the LSG pressure sensor is also established, which agrees well with the experimental results. This work indicates that laser scribed flexible graphene pressure sensors could be widely used for artificial e-skin, medical-sensing, bio-sensing and many other areas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".