MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000214647 · doi:10.1021/acsami.5b00373

Paper as a Platform for Sensing Applications and Other Devices: A Review

2015· review· en· W2000214647 on OpenAlexafffund
Suresha K. Mahadeva, Konrad Walus, Boris Stoeber

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Applied Materials & Interfaces · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiosensors and Analytical Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanada Research ChairsCanada Foundation for InnovationBCFRST Foundation
KeywordsNanotechnologyElectronicsScalabilityMaterials scienceCommercializationFabricationMicrofluidicsFlexible electronicsPiezoelectricityEnergy harvestingComputer scienceSystems engineeringElectrical engineeringEnergy (signal processing)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Paper is a ubiquitous material that has various applications in day to day life. A sheet of paper is produced by pressing moist wood cellulose fibers together. Paper offers unique properties: paper allows passive liquid transport, it is compatible with many chemical and biochemical moieties, it exhibits piezoelectricity, and it is biodegradable. Hence, paper is an attractive low-cost functional material for sensing devices. In recent years, researchers in the field of science and engineering have witnessed an exponential growth in the number of research contributions that focus on the development of cost-effective and scalable fabrication methods and new applications of paper-based devices. In this review article, we highlight recent advances in the development of paper-based sensing devices in the areas of electronics, energy storage, strain sensing, microfluidic devices, and biosensing, including piezoelectric paper. Additionally, this review includes current limitations of paper-based sensing devices and points out issues that have limited the commercialization of some of the paper-based sensing devices.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations349
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Applied Materials & InterfacesSame topicBiosensors and Analytical DetectionFrench-language works237,207