MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2412075859 · doi:10.1021/ma9022586

Gyroid-Forming Diblock Copolymers Confined in Cylindrical Geometry: A Case of Extreme Makeover for Domain Morphology

2010· article· en· W2412075859 on OpenAlexaff
Minglin Ma, Edwin L. Thomas, Gregory C. Rutledge, Bin Yu, Baohui Li, Qinghua Jin, Datong Ding, An‐Chang Shi

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecules · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicBlock Copolymer Self-Assembly
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGyroidCopolymerMaterials scienceMorphology (biology)Lamella (surface anatomy)Phase (matter)Composite materialPolymerChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The self-assembly of gyroid-forming diblock copolymers confined in cylindrical geometry is studied using a combination of computer simulations and experiments. The simulations, based on a system qualitatively representative of poly(styrene- b -isoprene), are performed with cylindrical nanopores of different diameter ( D ) and surface selectivity. The effects of the pore size and surface selectivity on morphology are systematically investigated. Different morphological sequences are predicted for two gyroid-forming diblock copolymers. The experiments are carried out on two gyroid-forming poly(styrene- b -dimethylsiloxane) block copolymer samples confined in the core of continuous core−shell nanofibers of different diameters, which are obtained by a coaxial two-fluid electrospinning technique. The internal microphase-separated morphologies of these fibers are investigated by transmission electron microscopy (TEM). Both simulations and experiments demonstrate that a rich variety of structures spontaneously form for the gyroid-forming diblock copolymers, depending on the conditions of cylindrical confinement. Many of these confinement-induced structures are quite different from those of cylinder-forming or lamella-forming block copolymers. Simulations further show that these structures depend sensitively on the block copolymer composition, surface selectivity, and the ratio D / L 0 where L 0 is the period of the equilibrium gyroid phase. While the simulation and experimental systems are representative of different chemistries, the morphological predictions of simulations are qualitatively consistent with the experimental observations.

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 score0.002

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations64
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacromoleculesSame topicBlock Copolymer Self-AssemblyFrench-language works237,207