Controlling the Shape and Alignment of Mesopores by Confinement in Colloidal Crystals: Designer Pathways to Silica Monoliths with Hierarchical Porosity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Monolithic pieces of hierarchically structured silica, containing both periodic macropores and mesopores with well-controlled architecture, are synthesized by dual templating methods. Colloidal crystal templating with close-packed arrays of poly(methyl methacrylate) spheres yields regular, highly interconnected macropores a few hundred nanometers in diameter, and templating with nonionic surfactants produces mesoporosity (2.5-5.1 nm pore diameters) in the macropore walls. Several distinct mesostructures can be achieved within the silica skeleton, depending on the choice of surfactant, co-surfactant, and processing conditions. In the three-dimensional (3D) confinement of the colloidal crystal template, wormlike channels, cubic (Pm3n), or two-dimensional (2D) hexagonal (P6mm) mesostructures are produced with the surfactant Brij 56 (C16H33(OCH2CH2)nOH (n approximately 10) and dodecane as cosurfactant. In the 2D hexagonal structure, channels are oriented perpendicular to the polymer spheres, thereby connecting adjacent macropores through the silica walls. This orientation contrasts with channel alignment parallel to latex spheres when the polymeric surfactant Pluronic P123 (EO20PO70EO20) is used. On the basis of high-resolution 3D transmission electron microscopy, scanning electron microscopy, small-angle X-ray scattering, and nitrogen sorption measurements, structural and textural properties of the monoliths are described in detail as a function of the synthesis parameters. The control over the mesoarchitecture of these silica-surfactant systems in 3D confinement is explained by considering the relative dimensions of the mesostructures with respect to the interstitial space in the latex template, interfacial interactions, entropic effects, and structural frustration.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".