Axisymmetric Drop Shape Analysis−Constrained Sessile Drop (ADSA-CSD): A Film Balance Technique for High Collapse Pressures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Collapse pressure of insoluble monolayers is a property determined from surface pressure/area isotherms. Such isotherms are commonly measured by a Langmuir film balance or a drop shape technique using a pendant drop constellation (ADSA-PD). Here, a different embodiment of a drop shape analysis, called axisymmetric drop shape analysis-constrained sessile drop (ADSA-CSD) is used as a film balance. It is shown that ADSA-CSD has certain advantages over conventional methods. The ability to measure very low surface tension values (e.g., <2 mJ/m2), an easier deposition procedure than in a pendant drop setup, and leak-proof design make the constrained sessile drop constellation a better choice than the pendant drop constellation in many situations. Results of compression isotherms are obtained on three different monolayers: octadecanol, dipalmitoyl-phosphatidyl-choline (DPPC), and dipalmitoyl-phosphatidyl-glycerol (DPPG). The collapse pressures are found to be reproducible and in agreement with previous methods. For example, the collapse pressure of DPPC is found to be 70.2 mJ/m2. Such values are not achievable with a pendant drop. The collapse pressure of octadecanol is found to be 61.3 mJ/m2, while that of DPPG is 59.0 mJ/m2. The physical reasons for these differences are discussed. The results also show a distinctive difference between the onset of collapse and the ultimate collapse pressure (ultimate strength) of these films. ADSA-CSD allows detailed study of this collapse region.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".