Conductivity of inkjet-printed PEDOT:PSS-SWCNTs on uncoated papers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiopene): poly (styrene-sulfonate), or PEDOT:PSS, as well as singlewalled carbon nanotubes, were incorporated into an inkjet ink. Handsheets were prepared which contained varying amounts of TiO2filler, internal sizing agent, fixation agent, and either softwood or hardwood kraft pulp. The ink was jetted onto the handsheets to form conductive layers with apparent conductivity as high as 0.018 S/cm on internally alkyketene dimer-sized softwood kraft handsheets with no other additives. Internal sizing increased conductivity at low filler loadings by preventing PEDOT:PSS from penetrating into the substrate, resulting in a conductive ink film on the surface of the sample. Unsized handsheets allowed more rapid absorption, and therefore deeper penetration, of the PEDOT:PSS ink, which resulted in a more diffuse conductive layer. The inclusion of a polyethyleneimine retention aid for TiO2filler decreased conductivity significantly even in unfilled sheets by interaction with PSS-counterions. A positively charged fixation agent, poly(diallyldimethylammonium) chloride, reduced PEDOT conductivity through the retention of nonconductive PSS-anions.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".