Interaction Stresses in Carbon Nanotube–Polymer Nanocomposites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new technique of atomic force microscopy interaction measurement is used to obtain the three-dimensional stress field in nanocomposites made of single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWNT) and poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) matrix. This original approach expands the current capability of AFM from imaging and force mapping to three-dimensional stress field measurements. Latest developments in the field have been limited to three-dimensional imaging at the surface only, and one value (adhesion) force mapping. The current work provides the interaction stress results for a PMMA-SWNT nanocomposite and shows a maximum estimated load transfer of less than 7 MPa (the maximum attraction stress estimated). This value is obtained for an unfunctionalized nanocomposite and hence the interaction stress is mainly based on van der Waals interactions. This means that for this system, carbon nanotubes behave similar to an elastic-fully plastic material with a yield stress of less than 7 MPa. This phenomenon illustrates why carbon nanotubes may not show their strong mechanical properties (yield strength of above 10 GPa) in polymeric nanocomposites.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".