MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2402941619 · doi:10.1002/ppap.201500223

Nebulization of Nanocolloidal Suspensions for the Growth of Nanocomposite Coatings in Dielectric Barrier Discharges

2016· article· en· W2402941619 on OpenAlexaff
Jacopo Profili, O. Levasseur, Jean‐Bernard Blaisot, A. Koronai, Luc Stafford, Nicolas Ghérardi

Bibliographic record

VenuePlasma Processes and Polymers · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrohydrodynamics and Fluid Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceNanocompositeSuspension (topology)NanoparticleDielectricEconomies of agglomerationDielectric barrier dischargeChemical engineeringElectrodeTransmission electron microscopyColloidNanotechnologyScanning electron microscopeElectric fieldComposite materialOptoelectronicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nebulization of colloidal suspensions is analyzed by dynamic light scattering, scanning, and transmission electron microscopies. While primary agglomeration can be important for many nanoparticle‐solvent couples, our results indicate that for TiO2 nanoparticles dispersed in water, secondary agglomeration also occurs during nebulization. When nebulization is realized immediately after sustaining a plane‐to‐plane dielectric barrier discharge at atmospheric pressure, the collection efficiency of TiO2 nanoparticles increases due to the presence of a remanent electric field between the two electrodes. Finally, these findings are used to deposit SiO2–TiO2 nanocomposite thin films by alternating the deposition of dense silica‐like layers in a Townsend discharge and the collection of TiO2 nanoparticles through nebulization of the nanocolloidal suspension.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations38
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlasma Processes and PolymersSame topicElectrohydrodynamics and Fluid DynamicsFrench-language works237,207