MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975475877 · doi:10.1021/ma902383k

Parameters Affecting the Chiral Nematic Phase of Nanocrystalline Cellulose Films

2010· article· en· W1975475877 on OpenAlexaff
Jinhe Pan, Wadood Y. Hamad, Suzana K. Straus

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecules · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced Cellulose Research Studies
Canadian institutionsFPInnovationsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiquid crystalNanocrystalline materialMaterials sciencePhase (matter)Field strengthCelluloseSuspension (topology)Ionic strengthMagnetic fieldChemical engineeringDichroismChemical physicsOpticsOrganic chemistryChemistryNanotechnologyOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nanocrystalline cellulose (NCC) is extracted from woody biomass using acid hydrolysis. It has unique strength and distinctive optical/conductive/magnetic properties. When a suspension of NCC is air-dried, it forms a film with unique characteristics (e.g., iridescence) linked to the formation of chiral nematic structure. In this contribution, the effects of ionic strength, temperature, suspension concentration, and exposure to magnetic field on the morphology of NCC are examined. The influence of these parameters on chiral nematic phase is investigated at a macroscopic level using circular dichroism and polarized microscopy. It is demonstrated that the addition of salt to NCC suspensions, NCC concentration, temperature, and the presence of a magnetic field all have an effect on the pitch of the chiral nematic structure. For example, drying of the NCC film in the presence of a 0.2 T external magnetic field increases the pitch, in a manner dependent on drying time. The implication of these results for the structure and properties of NCC is 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: 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
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations231
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacromoleculesSame topicAdvanced Cellulose Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207