MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010278010 · doi:10.1021/la053308i

Carbon Nanotubes with Small and Tunable Diameters from Poly(ferrocenylsilane)-<i>b</i><i>lock</i>-polysiloxane Diblock Copolymers

2006· article· en· W2010278010 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer Lu, David A. Rider, Emanuel Onyegam, Hai Wang, Mitchell A. Winnik, Ian Manners, Qian Cheng, Qiang Fu, Jie Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueLangmuir · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon Nanotubes in Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceCarbon nanotubeNanostructureCopolymerPolymerAmorphous solidYield (engineering)NanotechnologyCatalysisChemical engineeringCarbon fibersComposite materialCrystallographyChemistryOrganic chemistryComposite number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Iron-containing nanostructures produced from various self-assembled poly(ferrocenylsilane)-block-polysiloxane thin films are catalytically active for the initiation and growth of high density, small diameter carbon nanotubes (CNTs). Moreover, the tube diameter and density can be tuned by adjusting the chain lengths of the block copolymer. Iron-containing nanostructures from poly(ferrocenylmethylethylsilane)-b-poly(methylvinylsiloxane) polymer with 25 repeat units of an iron-containing segment and 265 repeat units of a non-iron-containing segment are able to produce CNTs with diameters around or less than 1 nm. Lithographically selective growth of CNTs across a large surface area has been demonstrated using this polymer system. Under the same growth condition, it has been found that the yield of defect-free CNTs varies with the size of the catalytically active nanostructures, which are dictated by the chain lengths of the two blocks. This result indicates that, for a specific-sized catalyst nanocluster, a unique set of growth conditions is required for synthesizing high yield, defect-free CNTs. This finding further addresses the importance of using uniform-sized catalyst-containing nanostructures for consistently achieving high-yield and high-quality CNTs with a minimum number of defects and amount of amorphous carbon.

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations30
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLangmuirSame topicCarbon Nanotubes in CompositesFrench-language works237,207