MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005501905 · doi:10.1080/02678290701614657

Computational modelling of nematic phase ordering by film and droplet growth over heterogeneous substrates

2007· article· en· W2005501905 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueLiquid Crystals · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicLiquid Crystal Research Advancements
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsLiquid crystalMaterials scienceNucleationIsotropyCurvatureWettingThermotropic crystalPhase (matter)Condensed matter physicsContact angleSurface tensionSubstrate (aquarium)Chemical physicsBiaxial nematicOpticsComposite materialThermodynamicsGeometryOptoelectronicsChemistryPhysicsLiquid crystalline

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a computational study of defect nucleation associated with the kinetics of the isotropic‐to‐nematic phase ordering transition over heterogeneous substrates, as it occurs in new liquid crystal biosensor devices, based on the Landau–de Gennes model for rod‐like thermotropic nematic liquid crystals. Two regimes are identified due to interfacial tension inequalities: (i) nematic surface film nucleation and growth normal to the heterogeneous substrate, and (ii) nematic surface droplet nucleation and growth. The former, known as wetting regime, leads to interfacial defect shedding at the moving nematic‐isotropic interface. The latter droplet regime, involves a moving contact line, and exhibits two texturing mechanisms that also lead to interfacial defect shedding: (a) small and large contact angles of drops spreading over a heterogeneous substrate, and (b) small drops with large curvature growing over homogeneous patches of the substrate. The numerical results are consistent with qualitative defect nucleation models based on the kinematics of the isotropic–nematic interface and the substrate–nematic–isotropic contact line. The results extend current understanding of phase ordering over heterogeneous substrates by elucidating generic defect nucleation processes at moving interfaces and moving contact lines.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.804

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.279 · 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