Self-assembly of diblock copolymers confined in cylindrical nanopores
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-assembly of AB diblock copolymers confined in cylindrical nanopores is studied using a simulated annealing technique. The pore diameter and surface preference are systematically varied to examine their effects on the self-assembled morphologies and the chain conformations. For bulk lamella-forming and cylinder-forming diblock copolymers, novel structures such as helices and concentric (perforated) lamellae spontaneously form when the copolymers are confined in cylindrical pores. The observed equilibrium morphologies are compared with that obtained from experiments, theory, and other simulations. A simple model is proposed for symmetric diblock copolymers, which gives a reasonable description of the layer thickness for the concentric lamellae. It is found that chains near the pore surfaces are compressed relative to the bulk chains, which can be attributed to the existence of the surfaces. The dependence of the chain conformation on the degree of confinement and strength of the surface preference are reasonably explained. The energetics is discussed qualitatively and used to account for the appearance of the complex phase behavior observed for certain intermediate conditions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".