MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067967098 · doi:10.1002/elps.200600031

Electrokinetic transport of charged solutes in micro‐ and nanochannels: The influence of transverse electromigration

2006· article· en· W2067967098 on OpenAlexaff
Xiangchun Xuan, Dongqing Li

Bibliographic record

VenueElectrophoresis · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrokinetic phenomenaElectromigrationChemical physicsDispersion (optics)ElectrophoresisTransverse planeStreaming currentDiffusionElectro-osmosisMaterials scienceChemistryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)MechanicsNanotechnologyThermodynamicsChromatographyComposite materialOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The accurate prediction of electrokinetic migration velocity and dispersion is crucial to separating electrophoretically charged solutes in micro- or nanochannels. In this paper, we investigate numerically the influence of transverse electromigration (TEM) on the solute electrokinetic transport in a series of micro- and nanochannels. The TEM, often ignored in previous studies, is demonstrated to significantly affect the solute migration velocity in nanochannels and the electrokinetic dispersion in microchannels. This is because the TEM can force either positively charged solutes into or negatively charged solutes out of the electrical double layer that forms adjacent to the negatively charged channel wall and contains the velocity gradients. Analytical solutions are also derived for characterizing the electrokinetic transport of charged solutes in nanochannels, which has been validated to be in good agreement with the numerical simulation. Moreover, we demonstrate that the proposed analytical formula for the solute migration velocity actually applies to channels of any size.

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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.157
Teacher spread0.155 · 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

Citations29
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectrophoresisSame topicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207