MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974245322 · doi:10.1149/1.3655505

Morphological Instabilities and the Dynamics of Carbon Nanotube Forest Growth

2011· article· en· W1974245322 on OpenAlexafffund
Paul Finnie, Phillip Vinten, Paul A. Marshall, J. Lefebvre

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Transactions · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon Nanotubes in Composites
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaInstitute for Microstructural Sciences
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNucleationCarbon nanotubeMaterials scienceChemical physicsGrowth rateIn situNanotechnologyChemistryPhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vertically aligned carbon nanotube forests show various morphologies on both macro- and micro-scales. These morphologies are a result of growth mechanisms and interactions between nanotubes. By investigating these morphologies, we study both the growth mechanisms and the interactions. We examine forest morphologies in situ, dynamically during chemical vapor deposition growth and ex situ, post growth. In situ observations allow the separate characterization of nucleation, growth and termination phases, and the exploration of connections between morphology and growth. Forests systematically show different morphologies, ranging from uniform to cracked, delaminated, and periodically rippled. These are discussed in terms of the balance of forces within the forests including cohesion, adhesion, and stiffness. We propose a simplified model that predicts termination as a result of an imbalance in the forces present. We show that growth rate differences drive many morphological effects, and these differences originate in the nucleation phase due to gas diffusion.

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 score0.280
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS TransactionsSame topicCarbon Nanotubes in CompositesFrench-language works237,207