MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064754861 · doi:10.1021/la304189n

A Molecular and Thermodynamic View of the Assembly of Gold Nanoparticles in Nematic Liquid Crystal

2013· article· en· W2064754861 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Milette, Violeta Toader, Ezequiel R. Soulé, R. Bruce Lennox, Alejandro D. Rey, Linda Reven

Bibliographic record

VenueLangmuir · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicLiquid Crystal Research Advancements
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiquid crystalNanoparticleColloidal goldMaterials scienceNanotechnologyChemical physicsChemistryChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The molecular interactions driving the assembly of gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) in a nematic liquid crystal (LC) are directly detected by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy and thermodynamically analyzed. The orientational orders of the selectively deuterated LC matrix and AuNP ligands, each separately followed by variable temperature (2)H NMR as a function of particle concentration, were observed to be strongly correlated. The mechanism of the reversible formation of long-range, quasi-periodic nanoparticle structures is attributed to the coupling of the AuNP ligands to the LC matrix, inducing an isotropic-nematic biphasic state. Experimentally validated thermodynamic modeling shows that, in contrast to colloidal nematics that are dominated by elastic forces, nematic dispersions of nanoparticles self-organize through a subtle balance of entropic forces and excluded volume, interface-mediated mesogen and nanoparticle molecular interactions, and couplings between conserved and nonconserved order parameters. Fine-tuning of these interactions through ligand and mesogen chemistry, together with mesoscale modeling, provides a route for materials innovations by merging structured fluid physics and nanoscience.

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)0.000
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations35
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLangmuirSame topicLiquid Crystal Research AdvancementsFrench-language works237,207