MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2591557842 · doi:10.1021/acsami.7b00126

Silicone-Infused Antismudge Nanocoatings

2017· article· en· W2591557842 on OpenAlexafffund
Heng Hu, Jian Wang, Yu Wang, Emily Gee, Guojun Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Applied Materials & Interfaces · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSurface Modification and Superhydrophobicity
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceCoatingPolyurethaneSiliconeSilicone oilComposite materialDewettingCuring (chemistry)Wetting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A polyurethane-based NP-GLIDE coating that bears on its surface and in its interior nano-pools of a grafted liquid ingredient for dewetting enablement is obtained from casting and curing a film comprising a triisocyanate, a polyol (P1), and a graft (g) copolymer of P1 and poly(dimethylsiloxane) (P1-g-PDMS). A silicone-infused NP-GLIDE (SINP-GLIDE) PU coating is obtained from cocasting the NP-GLIDE precursors with a free silicone oil (SO) or SO mixture (SOs). This paper reports the preparation of the novel SINP-GLIDE coatings and discusses the effect of changing the amount and type of the infused SO as well as the coating formation conditions on their optical clarity. Also reported are the contact and sliding angles of various test liquids on the NP-GLIDE and SINP-GLIDE coatings, and the data variation trends are rationalized using existing theories. Further, the stable water sliding performance of the SINP-GLIDE coatings under simulated raining and other conditions is demonstrated. The improved and stable water sliding performance of the SINP-GLIDE coatings facilitates their practical applications.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations77
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Applied Materials & InterfacesSame topicSurface Modification and SuperhydrophobicityFrench-language works237,207