MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001496954 · doi:10.1063/1.1418424

Surface wrinkling of two mutually attracting elastic thin films due to van der Waals forces

2001· article· en· W2001496954 on OpenAlexaff
C. Q. Ru

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Thin Films
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstabilityvan der Waals forceMetastabilitySurface (topology)Surface forceElastic instabilityMechanicsPhysicsClassical mechanicsCondensed matter physicsPlane (geometry)Materials scienceMathematicsGeometryQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article studies surface instability of two mutually attracting elastic films due to van der Waals forces under plane strain conditions. The analysis is based on an approximate method which reduces a two-dimensional problem of an elastic film to a one-dimensional surface problem. This method is much simpler than the conventional method and allows one to easily identify the critical value of the interaction coefficient and the surface instability mode. The accuracy of this method is demonstrated by the excellent agreement (with relative errors less than 5%) between the predicted results and the known exact data for a special case of an elastic film interacting with a rigid flat surface. The incompatibility of the individual fundamental modes of two elastic layers with unequal thickness results in two distinct metastable instability modes when the thickness ratio exceeds a critical value, in contrast to the uniqueness of the surface instability mode of an elastic film attracted to a rigid flat surface. This nonuniqueness of the metastable instability modes would cause complex surface instability phenomena of two interacting elastic films (such as jump between the two instability modes).

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)0.001
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations43
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicFluid Dynamics and Thin FilmsFrench-language works237,207