Assessing flow alignment of nematic liquid crystals through linear viscoelasticity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shear alignment of rodlike nematic liquid crystals is found when the reactive parameter $\ensuremath{\lambda}>1$. Measurements of $\ensuremath{\lambda}$ usually require complex experiments. This paper presents a method based on the nematodynamic theory of Leslie and Ericksen that assesses flow alignment through small amplitude oscillatory flow. The method is based on the fact that the effect of $\ensuremath{\lambda}$ on the storage modulus ${G}^{\ensuremath{'}}$ of linear viscoelasticity, when the director is along the flow direction, is directly proportional to $\ensuremath{\lambda}\ensuremath{-}1$. Thus the alignment-nonalignment transition for increasing lambda is a reentrant viscoelastic transition: viscoelastic $(\ensuremath{\lambda}<1)$\ensuremath{\rightarrow}purely viscous $(\ensuremath{\lambda}=0)$\ensuremath{\rightarrow}viscoelastic $(\ensuremath{\lambda}>1)$ that is reflected in the storage modulus ${G}^{\ensuremath{'}}$ and in the ``loss angle'' $\ensuremath{\delta}={\mathrm{tan}}^{\ensuremath{-}1}({G}^{\ensuremath{''}}∕{G}^{\ensuremath{'}})$. The methodology is demonstrated by analyzing the Leslie-Ericksen equations for small-amplitude oscillatory Poiseuille flow of $(4\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{n}\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{\text{octyl}}\text{\ensuremath{-}}{4}^{\ensuremath{'}}\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{\text{cyanobiphenyl}})$ (8CB) using analytical and scaling methods. Since linear viscoelastic moduli are easily accessible, the proposed methodology is an additional useful and economical tool for nematodynamicists.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".