MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995767141 · doi:10.1021/la048203e

Tradeoff between Mixing and Transport for Electroosmotic Flow in Heterogeneous Microchannels with Nonuniform Surface Potentials

2004· article· en· W1995767141 on OpenAlexafffund
Fuzhi Tian, Baoming Li, Daniel Y. Kwok

Bibliographic record

VenueLangmuir · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMixing (physics)Flow (mathematics)MechanicsSurface (topology)ChemistryElectro-osmosisMaterials scienceElectrokinetic phenomenaThermodynamicsChromatographyNanotechnologyPhysicsElectrophoresis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electroosmotic flow (EOF) is a phenomenon associated with the movement of an aqueous solution induced by the application of an electric field in microchannels. The characteristics of EOF depend on the nature of the surface potential, i.e., whether it is uniform or nonuniform. In this paper, a lattice Boltzmann model (LBM) combined with the Poisson-Boltzmann equation is used to simulate flow field in a rectangular microchannel with nonuniform (step change) surface potentials. The simulation results indicate that local circulations can occur near a heterogeneous region with nonuniform surface potentials, in agreement with those by other authors. Largest circulations, which imply a highest mixing efficiency due to convection and short-range diffusion, were found when the average surface potential is zero, regardless of whether the distribution of the heterogeneous patches is symmetric or asymmetric. In this work, we have illustrated that there is a trade-off between the mixing and liquid transport in EOF microfluidics. One should not simply focus on mixing and neglect liquid transport, as performed in the literature. Excellent mixing could lead to a poor transport of electroosmotic flow in microchannels.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations55
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLangmuirSame topicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207