Wettability on Chemically Heterogeneous Surfaces via a Mean-Field Lattice Boltzmann Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contact angle behaviors on heterogeneous surfaces were studied by a mean-field free-energy lattice Boltzmann method recently proposed [Phys. Rev. E, 69, 032602 (2004)]. Our results suggest that Cassie equation is valid only when the patch size is on the same order of the liquid-vapor interfacial thickness. It also implies that Cassie relation in macroscopic contact angle measurements is in general not valid as it is nearly impossible to patch regular surface patterns on the order of the interfacial thickness (» 10 ˚ These findings agree well with thermodynamics based on a free-energy approach. The relation proposed by Israelachvili and Gee [Langmuir, 5, 288 (1989)] was also examined and found no agreement. We also illustrated that, for surfaces with larger heterogeneous patches, the apparent contact angle is solely determined by local surface properties near the contact point. Simulations were also performed for self-propelled drop movement by means of a local surface tension gradient. Our results demonstrated that a mean-field lattice Boltzmann method shows large potential for future interfacial studies.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".