MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Micro/Nanospheres Generation by Fluid-Fluid Interaction Technology: A Literature Review

2016· review· en· W2471676360 on OpenAlexaff
Lei Lei, Donald J. Bergstrom, Bing Zhang, Hongbo Zhang, Ruixue Yin, Ki‐Young Song, Wenjun Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueRecent Patents on Nanotechnology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques Innovation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review focuses on the fundamental fluid mechanics which governs the generation of micro/nanospheres. The micro/nanosphere generation process has gathered significant attention in the past two decades, since micro/nanospheres are widely used in drug delivery, food science, cosmetics, and other application areas. Many methods have been developed based on different operating principles, such as microfluidic methods, electrospray methods, chemical methods, and so forth. This paper focuses on microfluidic methods. Although the structure of the microfluidic devices may be different, the operating principles behind them are often very similar. Following an initial discussion of the fluid mechanics related to the generation of microspheres, various design approaches are discussed, including T-junction, flow focusing, membrane emulsification, modified T-junction, and double emulsification methods. The advantages and problems associated with each method are also discussed. Next, the most commonly used computational fluid dynamics (CFD) methods are reviewed at three different levels: microscopic, mesoscopic, and macroscopic. Finally, the issues identified in the current literature are discussed, and some suggestions are offered regarding the future direction of technology development related to micro/nanosphere generation. Few relevant patents to the topic have been reviewed and cited.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.784
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecent Patents on NanotechnologySame topicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques InnovationFrench-language works237,207