MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2302527490 · doi:10.1039/c6sm00204h

A constriction resistance model of conjugated polymer based piezoresistive sensors for electronic skin applications

2016· article· en· W2302527490 on OpenAlexaff
Nazanin Khalili, Hani E. Naguib, Roy H. Kwon

Bibliographic record

VenueSoft Matter · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPiezoresistive effectMaterials sciencePolypyrroleSensitivity (control systems)NanotechnologyResistive touchscreenElectronic skinComputer scienceContact resistanceRobotTactile sensorConductive polymerOptoelectronicsElectronic engineeringArtificial intelligencePolymerComposite materialEngineeringComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human intervention can be replaced through the development of tools resulting from utilization of sensing devices possessing a wide range of applications including humanoid robots or remote and minimally invasive surgeries. Similar to the five human senses, sensors interface with their surroundings to stimulate a suitable response or action. The sense of touch which arises in human skin is among the most challenging senses to emulate due to its ultra high sensitivity. This has brought forth novel challenging issues to consider in the field of biomimetic robotics. In this work, using a multiphase reaction, a polypyrrole (PPy) based hydrogel is developed as a resistive type pressure sensor with an intrinsically elastic microstructure stemming from three dimensional hollow spheres. It is shown that the electrical conductivity of the fabricated PPy based piezoresistive sensors is enhanced as a result of adding conductive fillers and therefore, endowing the sensors with a higher sensitivity. A semi-analytical constriction resistance based model accounting for the real contact area between the PPy hydrogel sensors and the electrode along with the dependency of the contact resistance change on the applied load is developed. The model is then solved using a Monte Carlo technique and its corresponding sensitivity is obtained. Comparing the results with their experimental counterparts, the proposed modeling methodology offers a good tracking ability.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations27
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSoft MatterSame topicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting MaterialsFrench-language works237,207