On the Maximum Spreading Diameter of Impacting Droplets on Well-Prepared Solid Surfaces
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a systematic study of liquid droplet impact on three polymer surfaces: poly(methyl methacrylate), poly(methyl methacrylate/n-butyl methacrylate), and poly(n-butyl methacrylate). Changing from one surface to the next represents an incremental variation in solid surface tensions of 5-6 mJ/m2. These surfaces were prepared through careful experimental procedures that were used for the determination of solid surface tensions from contact angles. Our data for the maximum spreading diameter of water and formamide impacting on these surfaces were compared with those predicted from literature models. Of the models selected, we modified the model of Pasandideh-Fard et al. [Phys. Fluids 1996, 8, 650] and the results yielded a least error of only 5.09 +/- 5.05% in the determination of the maximum spreading diameter. The improved model was also compared with literature data, and good agreement was found. Of course, any such comparisons would rely on accurate experimental impact dynamics data on carefully prepared surfaces.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 it