MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017219794 · doi:10.1063/1.3514138

A total internal reflection fluorescence microscopy study of mass diffusion enhancement in water-based alumina nanofluids

2010· article· en· W2017219794 on OpenAlexafffund
Jocelyn Veilleux, Sylvain Coulombe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanofluid Flow and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsRhodamine 6GThermal diffusivityNanofluidTotal internal reflection fluorescence microscopeDiffusionAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryMass diffusivityMicroscopyDispersion (optics)NanoparticleMaterials scienceFluorescenceOpticsNanotechnologyThermodynamicsChromatographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mass diffusion of rhodamine 6G (R6G) in water-based alumina nanofluids is studied by means of total internal reflection fluorescence (TIRF) microscopy. We report a mass diffusivity enhancement that reaches an order of magnitude in a 2 vol % nanofluid when compared to the value in deionized water. Since experiments were performed with positively charged R6G, interfacial complexation between the dye and the nanoparticles was not observed. The effect of local density variations on mass diffusivity measurements is also addressed. An explanation for the enhancement of mass diffusion is presented using arguments based on dispersion, and it is shown that it correctly describes the order of magnitude differences between the thermal conductivity and mass diffusivity enhancements reported in the literature.

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations74
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicNanofluid Flow and Heat TransferFrench-language works237,207