MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898455399 · doi:10.3390/s18113605

Piezoelectric Polymer and Paper Substrates: A Review

2018· review· en· W2898455399 on OpenAlexafffund
Kiran Kumar Sappati, Sharmistha Bhadra

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsPiezoelectricityPolymerMaterials scienceEngineeringComputer scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polymers and papers, which exhibit piezoelectricity, find a wide range of applications in the industry. Ever since the discovery of PVDF, piezo polymers and papers have been widely used for sensor and actuator design. The direct piezoelectric effect has been used for sensor design, whereas the inverse piezoelectric effect has been applied for actuator design. Piezo polymers and papers have the advantages of mechanical flexibility, lower fabrication cost and faster processing over commonly used piezoelectric materials, such as PZT, BaTiO₃. In addition, many polymer and paper materials are considered biocompatible and can be used in bio applications. In the last 20 years, heterostructural materials, such as polymer composites and hybrid paper, have received a lot of attention since they combine the flexibility of polymer or paper, and excellent pyroelectric and piezoelectric properties of ceramics. This paper gives an overview of piezoelectric polymers and papers based on their operating principle. Main categories of piezoelectric polymers and papers are discussed with a focus on their materials and fabrication techniques. Applications of piezoelectric polymers and papers in different areas are also presented.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations321
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting MaterialsFrench-language works237,207