MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999144936 · doi:10.1163/016942410x488887

Modeling of Biologically Inspired Adhesive Pads Using Monte Carlo Analysis

2010· article· en· W1999144936 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

VenueJournal of Adhesion Science and Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdhesiveMaterials scienceMonte Carlo methodAdhesionSynthetic fiberFiberComposite materialBiological systemNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, the analysis and prototyping of biologically inspired adhesive pads have been the subject of growing interest. Similar to biological counterparts, these synthetic adhesives consist of rafts of tiny protruding fibers. The adhesion performance of these micro-engineered products is highly dependent on the geometrical and mechanical properties of the micro-fibers and the surface they adhere to. Small fluctuations in these parameters can drastically change their adhesion performance. In this investigation, a comprehensive mathematical model of a single micro-fiber with adhesion capability in contact with an uneven surface has been developed and the behavior of the model studied. To provide more realistic results, this analytical model could be extended to an array of micro-fibers. Thus, in a further step, using a Monte Carlo simulation, we studied an array of these micro-fibers under more realistic conditions with several degrees of uncertainty. The results deduced by this novel modeling approach are in good agreement with the experimental measurements of adhesion performance in synthetic adhesive pads available in literature.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.249 · 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