Printable Inks and Binders as Vehicles for Carrying/Depositing Phosphor Nanometer Particles and Ferroelectric Nanometer Particles on Screens for FEDs and EL Devices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two different vehicles have been designed for carrying and controllably depositing phosphor nanometer and ferroelectric nanometer particles. The first vehicle was an ink that could suspend and deposit phosphor particles that had been synthesized to have sub-micrometer primary particle sizes and narrow size distribution. Aggregation and settlement problems in the inks were addressed and the rheological properties of the inks were adjusted to facilitate the printing of phosphors in high resolution pixels. The relative cathodoluminescent intensities across a single pixel, containing the red emitting cubic-Y2O3:Eu3+ phosphor powder, were compared to assess the repeatability of the screen-printing of the inks.The second is a binder vehicle which not only carries the electroluminescent phosphor particles that can be up to 30 μm or more in size, but also carries the ferroelectric nanometer particles. This novel binder for AC powder displays was used to form low cost EL displays which require no additional dielectric reflector layers. The emissive layer can be peeled from the substrate as a flexible film which remains EL active when placed between two electrodes. The binder film can be easily screen printed and shaped as desired.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".