MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Interfacial Free Energy as the Key to the Pressure-Induced Deceleration of Ice Nucleation

2016· article· en· W2523571407 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jorge R. Espinosa, Alberto Zaragoza, P. Rosales-Pelaez, C. Navarro, Chantal Valeriani, Carlos Vega, Eduardo Sanz

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicnanoparticles nucleation surface interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadUniversidad Complutense de MadridMountain Equipment Co-operative
KeywordsNucleationMaterials scienceKey (lock)Energy (signal processing)Ice nucleusSurface energyMechanicsThermodynamicsPhysicsComposite materialComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The avoidance of water freezing is the holy grail in the cryopreservation of biological samples, food, and organs. Fast cooling rates are used to beat ice nucleation and avoid cell damage. This strategy can be enhanced by applying high pressures to decrease the nucleation rate, but the physics behind this procedure has not been fully understood yet. We perform computer experiments to investigate ice nucleation at high pressures consisting in embedding ice seeds in supercooled water. We find that the slowing down of the nucleation rate is mainly due to an increase of the ice I-water interfacial free energy with pressure. Our work also clarifies the molecular mechanism of ice nucleation for a wide pressure range. This study is not only relevant to cryopreservation, but also to water amorphization and climate change modeling.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.266
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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations89
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicnanoparticles nucleation surface interactionsFrench-language works237,207