Impact of Substrate and Processing on Confinement of Nafion Thin Films
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thin films of ion‐conducting polymers are an important area of study due to their function in many electrochemical devices and as analogues for interfacial phenomena that occur in bulk films. In this paper, the properties of Nafion, a prototypical ionomer, are investigated as thin films (4 to 300 nm) on carbon, gold, and platinum substrates that are fabricated using different casting methods and thermal histories. Specifically, water uptake, swelling, and morphology are investigated by quartz‐crystal microbalance, ellipsometry, and grazing‐incidence X‐ray scattering to develop structure/property/processing relationships. For all substrates, as the films' thickness decreased, there is an initial decrease in swelling followed by a subsequent increase for film thicknesses below ≈20 nm due to a disordering of the film hydrophilic/hydrophobic structure. Decreased swelling and less structural order is observed on gold for spin‐cast films compared to self‐assembled films; the opposite effect is observed for films on carbon. The presented systematic data set and analyses represent a thorough study of the behavior of Nafion thin films on model substrates of interest in metal catalyst/carbon electrodes, and these insights help to elucidate the underlying polymer physics and confinement effects in these and related systems.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".