Forces Acting on Objects in Nanopores with Irregularities - Irregular Nanopores as Shape Sensors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nanopores with irregularities are promising tools for distinguishing nano-size objects by their shape, but the forces on the object that critically influence its axial and rotational movement are unclear. The physics of the situation was described using the Poisson-Nernst-Planck and Navier-Stokes equations. With uniformly charged object the axial Coulomb and dielectric pressure (which opposes it and is surprisingly important), control the object's axial movement and rotation. Even without external pressure the hydrodynamic pressure is significant (negative at its upper and positive at its lower surface), but its total value is almost zero. If the object is charged only on the upper surface the axial upper Coulomb pressure is near zero close to the center, but negative near its end (the pressure is zero at the lower surface). The total axial dielectric pressure, which is largely dominated by the pressure at the upper surface, is positive along the length of the object becoming pronounced near its end. The axial hydrodynamic pressure is negative and significant at the upper surface (zero at the lower surface), diminishes in value near the object's end, critically influencing its axial movement, which becomes much faster. At its end the axial dielectric pressure prevails, and controls its rotation.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".