MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997861308 · doi:10.1021/la0504311

Measurement of the Elastic Modulus of Single Bacterial Cellulose Fibers Using Atomic Force Microscopy

2005· article· en· W1997861308 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLangmuir · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicForce Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElastic modulusDeflection (physics)Atomic force microscopyMaterials scienceCharacterization (materials science)ModulusNanometreNanoscopic scaleComposite materialNanoindentationNanomaterialsBacterial celluloseBendingMicroscopeMicroscopyFiberAtomic force acoustic microscopyYoung's modulusNanotechnologyOpticsCelluloseChemistryMagnetic force microscopePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability of the atomic force microscope to measure forces with subnanonewton sensitivity at nanometer-scale lateral resolutions has led to its use in the mechanical characterization of nanomaterials. Recent studies have shown that the atomic force microscope can be used to measure the elastic moduli of suspended fibers by performing a nanoscale three-point bending test, in which the center of the fiber is deflected by a known force. We extend this technique by modeling the deflection measured at several points along a suspended fiber, allowing us to obtain more accurate data, as well as to justify the mechanical model used. As a demonstration, we have measured a value of 78 +/- 17 GPa for Young's modulus of bacterial cellulose fibers with diameters ranging from 35 to 90 nm. This value is considerably higher than previous estimates, obtained by less direct means, of the mechanical strength of individual cellulose fibers.

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 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.237 · 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