MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995209398 · doi:10.1063/1.3267727

The effective diffusion coefficient of a small molecule in a two-phase gel medium

2009· article· en· W1995209398 on OpenAlexafffund
Christine Kingsburry, Gary W. Slater

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicDiffusion Coefficients in Liquids
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAdvanced Foods and Materials Network
KeywordsExpression (computer science)DiffusionStatistical physicsPhase (matter)AnalyteLattice (music)HickeyMaterials scienceChemistryThermodynamicsPhysicsComputer sciencePhysical chemistryQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using simple theoretical arguments and exact numerical lattice calculations, Hickey et al. [J. Chem. Phys. 124, 204903 (2006)] derived and tested an expression for the effective diffusion coefficient of a probe molecule in a two-phase medium consisting of a hydrogel with large gel-free inclusions. Although providing accurate predictions, this expression neglects important characteristics that such two-phase systems can present. In this article, we extend the previously derived expression in order to include local interactions between the gel and the analyte, interfacial effects between the main phase and the inclusions, and finally a possible incomplete separation between the two phases. We test our new, generalized expressions using exact numerical calculations. These generalized equations should be a useful tool for the development of novel multiphase systems for specific applications, such as drug-delivery platforms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicDiffusion Coefficients in LiquidsFrench-language works237,207