MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2481586490 · doi:10.1155/2016/2302595

Review of Research on Template Methods in Preparation of Nanomaterials

2016· article· en· W2481586490 on OpenAlexafffund
Yadian Xie, Duygu Kocaefe, Chunying Chen, Yaşar Kocaefe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nanomaterials · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMesoporous Materials and Catalysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsTemplateNanomaterialsTemplate method patternMaterials scienceNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nanomaterials have been widely used in various fields, such as photonics, catalysis, and adsorption, because of their unique physical and chemical properties. Therefore, their production methods are of utmost importance. Compared with traditional synthetic methods, the template method can effectively control the morphology, particle size, and structure during the preparation of nanomaterials, which is an effective method for their synthesis. The key for the template method is to choose different templates, which are divided into hard template and soft template according to their different structures. In this paper, the effects of different types of templates on the morphology of nanomaterials during their preparation are investigated from two aspects: hard template and soft template, combined with the mechanism of action.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.386 · 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 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

Citations342
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NanomaterialsSame topicMesoporous Materials and CatalysisFrench-language works237,207