DEFECT–DEFECT INTERACTION IN SINGLE-WALLED CARBON NANOTUBES UNDER TORSIONAL LOADING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents an analysis of interactions between a pair of Stone–Wales (SW) defects in a single-walled carbon nanotube (SWCNT) that has been subjected to an external torque. Defect pairs, representing the different combinations of SW defect of A (SW-A) and B (SW-B) modes, were incorporated in SWCNT models of different chirality and diameter and solved using molecular mechanics. Defect–defect interaction was investigated by evaluating the C–C steric interactions in the defect that possesses the highest potential energy, E, as a function of inter-defect distance, D. This study reveals that the deformation of the C–C bond is attributed to bond stretching and bending. In the SW-B defects, there is an additional contributor arising from the dihedral angular deformation. The magnitude of E depends on the type of defect but the profile of the E versus D curve depends on the orientation of the defects. The largest indifference length, D0, beyond which two defects cease to interact, is approximately 30 Å. When the angular displacement of the tube increases two-fold, E increases, but the profile of the E versus D curve is not affected. The sense of rotation affects the magnitude of E but not the profile of the E versus D curve.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".