Stick−Slip of the Three-Phase Line in Measurements of Dynamic Contact Angles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contact angles of a series of n-alkanes (i.e., n-heptane to n-hexadecane) are studied on two functionalized maleimide copolymers (i.e., poly(ethene-alt-N-(4-(perfluoroheptylcarbonyl)aminobutyl)maleimide) (ETMF) and poly(octadecene-alt-N-(4-(perfluoroheptylcarbonyl)aminobutyl)maleimide) (ODMF)). On the homogeneous ETMF films, all liquids show a smooth motion of the three-phase line. In contrast, on ODMF surfaces that are found to consist of mainly fluorocarbons and small patches of hydrocarbons, short-chain n-alkanes show a stick-slip pattern. By increasing the chain length of the probe liquids, stick-slip is reduced significantly. The phenomenon is discussed in the framework of the Cassie equation. It is found that the upper limit of contact angles in the stick-slip pattern is given by the advancing angle that would be obtained on the pure fluorocarbon surface, whereas the lower limit of the stick-slip pattern is given by the Cassie angle.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".