MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046719842 · doi:10.1166/jnn.2010.1999

Nanoimmiscibility: Selective Absorption of Liquid Methanol–Water Mixtures in Carbon Nanotubes

2010· article· en· W2046719842 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yi Liu, Styliani Consta, William A. Goddard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanopore and Nanochannel Transport Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCarbon nanotubeMaterials scienceMethanolMolecular dynamicsChemical engineeringMolecular sieveAbsorption (acoustics)Nanoscopic scaleAqueous solutionNanotechnologyMoleculeOrganic chemistryComposite materialComputational chemistryChemistryCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the continuing research interests in CNT-liquid systems, the microscopic structure and transport behavior of liquid mixtures in carbon nanotubes (CNTs) remain poorly understood. Methanol and water liquids are completely miscible across the entire range of concentration; however, recent research reveals that they are immiscible at a molecular level. In this work, we carried out classical molecular dynamics to study the molecular distribution, structure ordering, clustering and transport behavior of liquid methanol-water mixtures within CNT confinement. We found that CNTs preferentially absorbed methanol over water molecule even though the latter has a smaller molecular size, indicating that chemical effect such as molecular hydrophilicity plays a crucial role in the molecular absorption of CNTs. Due to the selective absorption of CNTs, methanol aqueous solution changes from microscopically immiscible to macroscopically immiscible at nanoscale. This nanoscale immiscibility may be utilized in various applications of CNTs including direct methanol fuel cells, nanosensors, molecular sieves, nanofluidic chips, and capsules for drug delivery.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.512

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations21
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nanoscience and NanotechnologySame topicNanopore and Nanochannel Transport StudiesFrench-language works237,207