MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2519477242 · doi:10.3390/jfb7030027

Synthesis and Characterization of Nanodiamond Reinforced Chitosan for Bone Tissue Engineering

2016· article· en· W2519477242 on OpenAlexafffund
Yu Sun, Q. Yang, Haidong Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Functional Biomaterials · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNanodiamondMaterials scienceCharacterization (materials science)ChitosanTissue engineeringNanotechnologyBiomedical engineeringComposite materialChemical engineeringDiamondEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multifunctional tissue scaffold material nanodiamond (ND)/chitosan (CS) composites with different diamond concentrations from 1 wt % to 5 wt % were synthesized through a solution casting method. The microstructure and mechanical properties of the composites were characterized using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray diffraction (XRD), Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), and nanoindentation. Compared with pristine CS, the addition of ND resulted in a significant improvement of mechanical properties, including a 239%, 276%, 321%, 333%, and 343% increase in Young's modulus and a 68%, 96%, 114%, 118%, and 127% increase in hardness when the ND amount was 1 wt %, 2 wt %, 3 wt %, 4 wt %, and 5 wt %, respectively. The strong interaction between ND surface groups and the chitosan matrix plays an important role in improving mechanical properties.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations57
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Functional BiomaterialsSame topicBone Tissue Engineering MaterialsFrench-language works237,207