Collective orientational dynamics of pinned chemically-propelled nanorotors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Collections of chemically propelled nanomotors free to move in solution can form dynamic clusters with diverse properties as a result of interactions through hydrodynamic flow and concentration fields, as well as direct intermolecular interactions between motors. Here, we study the collective rotational behavior of pinned sphere-dimer motors where direct motor-motor interactions play no role. Since the centers of mass of the motors are pinned, they cannot execute directed translational motion, but they can pump fluid and rotate; thus, the rotors remain coupled through hydrodynamic and chemical fields. Using a microscopic simulation method that accounts for coupling through both these fields, we show that different rotor configurations with a high degree of correlation exist and their forms depend on the nature of the fluid-rotor interactions. The correlations are greatly reduced or completely destroyed when the chemical interactions are removed, indicating that hydrodynamic coupling, while present, plays a lesser role in determining the collective rotor dynamics. These conclusions are supported by Langevin dynamics simulations that neglect hydrodynamics and include an approximate form of coupling through chemical fields.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".