Long range electrostatic forces in ionic liquids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ionic liquids are pure salts that are liquid under ambient conditions. As liquids composed solely of ions, the scientific consensus has been that ionic liquids have exceedingly high ionic strengths and thus very short Debye screening lengths. However, several recent experiments from laboratories around the world have reported data for the approach of two surfaces separated by ionic liquids which revealed remarkable long range forces that appear to be electrostatic in origin. Evidence has accumulated demonstrating long range surface forces for several different combinations of ionic liquids and electrically charged surfaces, as well as for concentrated mixtures of inorganic salts in solvent. The original interpretation of these forces, that ionic liquids could be envisioned as "dilute electrolytes," was controversial, and the origin of long range forces in ionic liquids remains the subject of discussion. Here we seek to collate and examine the evidence for long range surface forces in ionic liquids, identify key outstanding questions, and explore possible mechanisms underlying the origin of these long range forces. Long range surface forces in ionic liquids and other highly concentrated electrolytes hold diverse implications from designing ionic liquids for energy storage applications to rationalizing electrostatic correlations in biological self-assembly.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".