MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999910434 · doi:10.1117/12.876738

Large scale micropatterning of multi-walled carbon nanotube/polydimethylsiloxane nanocomposite polymer on highly flexible 12×24 inch substrates

2011· article· en· W1999910434 on OpenAlexaff
Ajit Khosla, Daniel Hilbich, Connie Drewbrook, Daehan Chung, Bonnie L. Gray

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon Nanotubes in Composites
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolydimethylsiloxaneMaterials scienceMicropatterningCarbon nanotubeNanocompositePolymerComposite materialMicrofabricationPolymer nanocompositeElectrodeNanotechnologyFabrication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the large scale micro-pattering of an electrically conducting multiwalled carbon nanotube (MWCNT) polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) nanocomposite polymer prepared by high frequency (42 kHz) ultrasonic agitation of MWCNTs in the PDMS polymer matrix. Large scale micropatterning of the MWCNT-PDMS nanocomposite is achieved via soft lithography employing a 12" × 24" poly-methyl methacrylate (PMMA, commercially known as Plexiglass) micromold. The process has a 20µm minimum feature size. The PMMA micromold is fabricated by laser ablating 5-mm thick, 12" × 24" sheets using the Universal Laser System's VersaLASER© laser cutter system which employs a CO2 laser. We have characterized and compared the resistivity of 1cm × 0.5cm × 0.5cm MWCNT-PDMS structures with varying weight percentage (wt-%) of MWCNT (1-10% wt%) in the PDMS matrix with a result that the percolation threshold is achieved at 2 wt-%. Furthermore, we have demonstrated the ability to fabricate large numbers of microelectrodes with a length of 3.0 cm, width of 500µm, and height of 400µm. The resistivity of these electrodes was found to be equal to 9.93Ωm with a deviation of approximately 10%, indicating uniformity across large areas of the substrate. We have also demonstrated a large scale 12" × 24 hybrid microfabrication process for combining micromolded MWCNT-PDMS nanocomposite microstructures with nonconductive PDMS polymer.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations12
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicCarbon Nanotubes in CompositesFrench-language works237,207