Dielectric Force and Relative Motion between Two Spherical Particles in Electrophoresis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When two particles close to each other are in electrophoretic motion, each particle is under the influence of the nonuniform electric field generated by the other particle. Two particles may attract or repel each other due to the dielectric force, depending on their positions in the nonuniform electric field. In this work, the dielectric interaction and the subsequent relative motion of the two arbitrarily oriented spherical particles are analyzed. The dielectric force is obtained by integrating the Maxwell stress. The result is valid for arbitrary orientations of the particles under the thin electrical-double-layer assumption. The magnitude of the dielectric force is compared to the so-called inertia-induced force, which shows that the dielectric force is normally much greater than the inertia-induced force. The relative velocity of particles is determined by the force balance between the dielectric force and the Stokes drag. The regions of attraction and repulsion are defined. It is shown that a pair of particles eventually aligns parallel to the externally applied electric field, except in the case where the two particles are initially oriented perpendicular to the electric field. A closed-form analytical solution is obtained for the particle trajectory by using the approximate expression for the dielectric force valid for not-too-closely located particles.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".