Simulations of a lattice model of two-headed linear amphiphiles: Influence of amphiphile asymmetry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a 2D lattice model, we conduct Monte Carlo simulations of micellar aggregation of linear-chain amphiphiles having two solvophilic head groups. In the context of this simple model, we quantify how the amphiphile architecture influences the critical micelle concentration (CMC), with a particular focus on the role of the asymmetry of the amphiphile structure. Accordingly, we study all possible arrangements of the head groups along amphiphile chains of fixed length N = 12 and 16 molecular units. This set of idealized amphiphile architectures approximates many cases of symmetric and asymmetric gemini surfactants, double-headed surfactants, and boloform surfactants. Consistent with earlier results, we find that the number of spacer units s separating the heads has a significant influence on the CMC, with the CMC increasing with s for s < N/2. In comparison, the influence of the asymmetry of the chain architecture on the CMC is much weaker, as is also found experimentally.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".