Understanding the Edge Effect in Wetting: A Thermodynamic Approach
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Edge effect is known to hinder spreading of a sessile drop. However, the underlying thermodynamic mechanisms responsible for the edge effect still is not well-understood. In this study, a free energy model has been developed to investigate the energetic state of drops on a single pillar (from upright frustum to inverted frustum geometries). An analysis of drop free energy levels before and after crossing the edge allows us to understand the thermodynamic origin of the edge effect. In particular, four wetting cases for a drop on a single pillar with different edge angles have been determined by understanding the characteristics of FE plots. A wetting map describing the four wetting cases is given in terms of edge angle and intrinsic contact angle. The results show that the free energy barrier observed near the edge plays an important role in determining the drop states, i.e., (1) stable or metastable drop states at the pillar's edge, and (2) drop collapse by liquid spilling over the edge completely or staying at an intermediate sidewall position of the pillar. This thermodynamic model presents an energetic framework to describe the functioning of the so-called "re-entrant" structures. Results show good consistency with the literature and expand the current understanding of Gibbs' inequality condition.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it