Proposition of stair climb of a drop using chemical wettability gradient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a passive technique for a drop to climb along the staircase textured surface using chemical wettability gradients. The stair structure, droplet configuration, and contact angle gradient are modeled using Lagrangian smoothed particle hydrodynamics. The stair climb efficiency of the droplet is found to be a function of wettability gradient strength. Using analytical balance of actuation and resistive forces across droplets, physical reasons behind stair climbing are established and influencing parameters are identified. Evolution of the droplet shape along with the advancing and the receding contact angles is presented from where instantaneous actuation and hysteresis forces are calculated. Using history of Lagrangian particles, circulation at the foot of stairs and progressing development of the advancing drop front are monitored. Higher efficiency in stair climbing in the case of a bigger sized drop than smaller one is obtained from simulation results and realized from force balance. Difficulty in climbing steeper stairs is also demonstrated to delineate the effect of gravitational pull against the actuation force due to the wettability gradient.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".