MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975041849 · doi:10.1109/nano.2011.6144428

Fabrication of optically patternable nanocomposite layers for smart polymer structure applications

2011· article· en· W1975041849 on OpenAlexaff
Alborz Amini, Behraad Bahreyni

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon Nanotubes in Composites
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFabricationNanocompositeMaterials scienceCarbon nanotubeNanotechnologyPolymerLithographyLayer (electronics)Percolation (cognitive psychology)Polymer nanocompositeElectrical conductorComposite materialOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We are reporting the development of a conductive nanocomposite for sensing applications. Unlike the previously reported research, our process flow allows for fabrication of nanocomposite structures that can be patterned using typical lithography techniques for fine features. This advantage lets us fabricate embedded micro-sensors within a multi-layer polymer structure. In order to demonstrate the principle, different SU8 structures were impregnated with carbon nanotubes and studied. These nanocomposite structures behave in a manner, resembling results of percolation theory. It is also demonstrated that filler concentration strongly affects the response of the fabricated nanocomposite structures to strain with measured gauge factors ranging from 1.5 to more than 15. The fabrication process is explained in detail and our study is supported by modeling of a random carbon nanotubes network based on our own simulation code. This technology will be used for fabrication of low-cost all-polymer structures with embedded sensors and actuators.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.241
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCarbon Nanotubes in CompositesFrench-language works237,207