Simulated Annealing Study of Self‐Assembly of Symmetric ABA Triblock Copolymers Confined in Cylindrical Nanopores
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We report a simulated annealing study of the self‐assembly of symmetric lamella‐forming ABA triblock copolymers confined in cylindrical nanopores. We systematically examine the dependence of the self‐assembled morphologies and structural parameters on the degree of confinement and the strength of the surface preference. We find that the confined morphologies for the symmetric ABA triblocks withfA = 1/2 are similar to those for the symmetric or nearly symmetric AB diblock copolymers under the same confinement. We also find that different structural parameters can reflect different information. The predicted bridging fraction value for the bulk phase is in good agreement with previously established values, whereas the predicted values for the confined morphologies change with both the degree of confinement and the strength of the surface preference. We further explore the self‐assembling process by examining the morphology and various ensemble‐averaged thermodynamic quantities and structure parameters as a function of the reduced temperature. magnified image
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".