MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808212334 · doi:10.1038/s41467-018-04816-2

Thermodynamic and structural anomalies of water nanodroplets

2018· article· en· W2808212334 on OpenAlexafffund
Shahrazad Malek, Peter H. Poole, Ivan Saika‐Voivod

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMaterial Dynamics and Properties
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier UniversityMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCompute Canada
KeywordsSupercoolingLaplace pressureChemical physicsThermodynamicsMaximum densityLiquid waterMaterials scienceAmbient pressureChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Liquid water nanodroplets are important in earth's climate, and are valuable for studying supercooled water because they resist crystallisation well below the bulk freezing temperature. Bulk liquid water has well-known thermodynamic anomalies, such as a density maximum, and when supercooled is hypothesised to exhibit a liquid-liquid phase transition (LLPT) at elevated pressure. However, it is not known how these bulk anomalies might manifest themselves in nanodroplets. Here we show, using simulations of the TIP4P/2005 water model, that bulk anomalies occur in nanodroplets as small as 360 molecules. We also show that the Laplace pressure inside small droplets reaches 220 MPa at 180 K, conditions close to the LLPT of TIP4P/2005. While the density and pressure inside nanodroplets coincide with bulk values at moderate supercooling, we show that deviations emerge at lower temperature, as well as significant radial density gradients, which arise from and signal the approach to the LLPT.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.263
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations45
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicMaterial Dynamics and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207