MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333570023 · doi:10.1166/jnn.2011.3567

Experimental Methods of Actuation, Characterization and Prototyping of Hydrogels for BioMEMS/NEMS Applications

2011· review· en· W2333570023 on OpenAlexaff
Tania S. Khaleque, Samy Abu-Salih, John Saunders, Walied A. Moussa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceSelf-healing hydrogelsCharacterization (materials science)MicrofluidicsNanotechnologyFabricationPolymer3D printingMicroelectromechanical systemsUltimate tensile strengthRapid prototypingComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a member of the smart polymer material group, stimuli responsive hydrogels have achieved a wide range of applications in microfluidic devices, micro/nano bio and environmental sensors, biomechanics and drug delivery systems. To optimize the utilization of a hydrogel in various micro and nano applications it is essential to have a better understanding of its mechanical and electrical properties. This paper presents a review of the different techniques used to determine a hydrogel's mechanical properties, including tensile strength, compressive strength and shear modulus and the electrical properties including electrical conductivity and dielectric permittivity. Also explored the effect of various prototyping factors and the mechanisms by which these factors are used to alter the mechanical and electrical properties of a hydrogel. Finally, this review discusses a wide range of hydrogel fabrication techniques and methods used, to date, to actuate this family of smart polymer material.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations14
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nanoscience and NanotechnologySame topicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting MaterialsFrench-language works237,207