Form Factor of Asymmetric Elongated Micelles: Playing with Russian Dolls Has Never Been so Informative
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scattering techniques (i.e., static light scattering, small angle neutron scattering,11 or small angle X-ray scattering) are excellent tools to study nanoscopic objects in solution. However, to interpret the experimental data, one needs to use the appropriate form factor. While recent progress has been made in the writing of form factors for complex structures, there is still a need to develop a method to evaluate the form factor of inhomogeneous elongated scatterers. Here, we propose an approach based on the principle of "Russian dolls". Multiblock rods are represented as multi generations of rods (mother, daughter, granddaughter, etc.), where each rod is nested within the rod of the previous generation, like Russian dolls. A shift parameter is used to introduce asymmetry in the rod along its long axis. This approach not only allowed us to write the form factor of multiblock rods, but it also gave us the possibility to account for the polydispersity in length of each block and of the shift parameter. Finally, we applied these equations to the case of a series of solutions of triblock comicelles slightly polydisperse in length.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".