MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141750640 · doi:10.1109/nano.2008.83

Effect of Percolation on Electrical Conductivity in a Carbon Nanotube-Based Film Radiation Sensor

2008· article· en· W2141750640 on OpenAlexaff
Jiazhi Ma, John T. W. Yeow, James C. L. Chow, Rob Barnett

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon Nanotubes in Composites
Canadian institutionsGrand River HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbon nanotubeMaterials sciencePercolation (cognitive psychology)ConductivityPercolation thresholdPercolation theoryElectrical resistivity and conductivityNanotechnologyComposite materialCurrent densityOptoelectronicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Devices based on carbon nanotube (CNT) films offer advantages over devices based on single CNT due to their ease of manufacture, good reproducibility, and high efficiency. A good understanding on percolation properties of CNT films is essential in the design of CNT-based film devices. In this paper, the effect of percolation on electrical conductivity in a CNT-based film radiation sensor was studied. CNT films with different densities were prepared to find the relationship between the film conductivity and the CNT density in the film. The effect of CNTs' length on the critical density of the film was also discussed based on percolation theory. The average length of CNTs determines the critical density of the film and in turn governs the film conductivity. For the CNT-based film radiation sensor, larger responses were achieved when the CNT film was prepared with 3 layers of CNTs. In general, it is expected that by using the unique properties of CNT films within the percolation region, devices based on such films can achieve superior performances.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCarbon Nanotubes in CompositesFrench-language works237,207