Exploiting both optical and electrical anisotropy in nanowire electrodes for higher transparency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transparent electrodes such as indium tin oxide and random meshes of silver nanowires (AgNWs) have isotropic in-plane properties. However, we show that imparting some alignment to AgNWs can create anisotropic transparency and electrical conductivity characteristics that may benefit many applications. For example, liquid crystal displays and the touch sensors on top of them often only need to be transparent to one type of polarized light as well as predominantly conductive in only one direction. Herein, AgNWs are slightly preferentially aligned during their deposition by rod coating. Compared to randomly oriented AgNW films, the alignment boosts the transparency to perpendicularly polarized light, as well as achieves a higher transparency for a given sheet resistance in one direction compared to randomly oriented AgNWs films. These factors together increase the transparency of a 16 Ω/sq electrode by 7.3 percentage points. The alignment technique is cheap and scalable, compatible with roll-to-roll processes, and most importantly does not require extra processing steps, as rod coating is already a standard process for AgNW electrode fabrication.
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 | 0.001 | 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".