Influence of Geometry and Surrounding Conditions on Fluid Flow in Paper-Based Devices
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
Fluid flow behaviour in paper is of increasing interest due to the advantages and expanding use of microfluidic paper-based analytical devices (known as µPADs). Applications are expanding from those which often have low sample fluid volumes, such as diagnostic testing, to those with an abundance of sample fluid, such as water quality testing. The rapid development of enhanced features in μPADs, along with a need for increased sensitivity and specificity in the embedded chemistry requires understanding the passively-driven fluid motion in paper to enable precise control and consistency of the devices. It is particularly important to understand the influence of parameters associated with larger fluid volumes and to quantify their impact. Here, we experimentally investigate the impacts of several properties during imbibition in paper, including geometry (larger width and length) and the surrounding conditions (humidity and temperature) using abundant fluid reservoirs. Fluid flow velocity in paper was found to vary with temperature and width, but not with length of the paper strip and humidity for the conditions we tested. We observed substantial post-wetting flow for paper strips in contact with a large fluid reservoir.
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 | 0.000 | 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