MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605183425 · doi:10.1021/acs.langmuir.7b00006

Lubrication with Soft and Hard Two-Dimensional Colloidal Arrays

2017· article· en· W2605183425 on OpenAlexafffund
Lucie Giraud, Gwénaëlle Bazin, Suzanne Giasson

Bibliographic record

VenueLangmuir · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLubricationColloidMaterials scienceNanotechnologyColloidal particleChemical engineeringChemistryComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Normal and friction forces between immobilized two-dimensional (2D) homogeneous non-close-packed colloidal arrays made of different particles are compared in aqueous media. Soft pH-responsive (microgels) and nonresponsive hard (silica) particles of different sizes were used to create the 2D arrays. The results show that the friction of soft responsive structured layers can be successfully modulated by varying the pH, with a friction coefficient varying by nearly 3 orders of magnitude (10 –2 to 1). This important change in lubricating properties is mainly correlated with the particle swelling behavior, i.e., the friction coefficient decreasing exponentially with an increase in the swelling ratio regardless of the size, surface coverage, and degree of ionization of the particles. In addition, the robustly attached microgel particles were able to sustain high pressure (up to 200 atm) without significant surface damage. The 2D arrays of nonresponsive hard particles also gave rise to a very low friction coefficient (μ ≈ 10 –3 ) under similar experimental conditions and could sustain a larger pressure without damage (≤600 atm). The low friction dissipation observed between the hard arrays resulted from a rolling mechanism. Even though rolling requires nonimmobilized particles on the substrates, the results show the importance of attaching a certain proportion of particles on the surfaces to reduce friction.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.382
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations14
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLangmuirSame topicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface InteractionsFrench-language works237,207