MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320616280 · doi:10.1021/ma402364r

Highly Ordered 3D Graphene-Based Polymer Composite Materials Fabricated by “Particle-Constructing” Method and Their Outstanding Conductivity

2014· article· en· W2320616280 on OpenAlexaff
Liang Yang, Zhaoqun Wang, Yucheng Ji, Jianing Wang, Gi Xue

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecules · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphene research and applications
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceGrapheneComposite numberPolymerFabricationComposite materialPercolation thresholdParticle (ecology)Percolation (cognitive psychology)CastingNanotechnologyElectrical resistivity and conductivity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fabrication of graphene-based polymer composite materials is of interest and significance from an academic and an application viewpoint. The widely used method to obtain such composites was liquid-phase blend of graphene nanosheets (GNSs) and polymer solutions followed by casting or heat pressing. Until now, the challenge of dispersing the GNSs uniformly in the polymer matrix to form controllable and regular structure still remains. Here, we developed a unique “particle-constructing” method for fabricating highly ordered 3D graphene-based polymer composite materials, throughout which the GNSs formed intact, uniform and well-defined network structure. The strategy contains two steps: wrapping polymer microspheres with GNSs and mold-compressing them at room temperature, followed by an appropriate heat treatment. The composite materials exhibited outstanding electrical properties involving extremely low percolation threshold and much higher conductivity. The method can be easily extended to fabricate highly ordered GNS aerogels and more GNS-based composite materials. The results represent an important step toward developing GNS-based composite materials with high performance.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations65
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacromoleculesSame topicGraphene research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207