Nanoparticle-Induced Charge Redistribution of the Air–Water Interface
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The air–water interface is believed to carry a negative electrostatic potential that is nontrivial to invert through pH, electrolyte, or electrolyte strength. Here, through a combined experimental and theoretical study, we show that the close approach of a negatively charged nanoparticle induces a charge redistribution of the air–water interface. Using different electrolytes to control the interfacial potential of the nanoparticles, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) results establish that nanoparticles with a more negative zeta potential adsorb closer to the air–water interface than do the same particles with a less negative zeta potential. The short-ranged attractive force between two (nominally) negative surfaces is caused by charge redistribution under the strong electric field of the nanoparticle that locally inverts the charge density of the air–water interface from negative to positive. The nature of the nanoparticle’s counterions modulates the attractive interaction, which thus could be used to control reactivity, stability, and nanoparticle self-assembly at air–water interfaces.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".