DEFECT–DEFECT INTERACTION IN SINGLE-WALLED CARBON NANOTUBES UNDER TORSIONAL LOADING
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
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, D 0 , 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it