MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039045219 · doi:10.1021/la903679x

Templated Self-Assembly of Glass Microspheres into Ordered Two-Dimensional Arrays under Dry Conditions

2009· article· en· W2039045219 on OpenAlexaff
Michael S. Miller, Gregory J. E. Davidson, Tricia Breen Carmichael

Bibliographic record

VenueLangmuir · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicModular Robots and Swarm Intelligence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrosphereSelf-assemblyMaterials scienceNanotechnologyChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a new approach to mesoscale self-assembly in which a stream of nitrogen is used to propel micrometer-scale components toward a template of patterned liquid adhesive drops. This approach combines the use of capillary forces to hold the components in place with dry processing conditions. Eliminating the use of a liquid medium to suspend components is an important goal for mesoscale self-assembly methods because it eliminates the need for special encapsulation to protect electrically functional components. We demonstrate the dry self-assembly approach by assembling 100 microm glass microspheres into a variety of 2D patterns. A study of defects in these arrays relates parameters associated with the template--density of binding sites and volume of liquid adhesive comprising the drops--to the frequency of defects arising from the incorporation of additional microspheres into the array. Optimized template parameters and self-assembly conditions yield 2D arrays with defect rates of approximately 4-5%. We also demonstrate the versatility of this self-assembly method by producing ordered binary arrays of clear and black glass microspheres.

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 score0.000
Threshold uncertainty score0.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLangmuirSame topicModular Robots and Swarm IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207