MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970478592 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.9b05374

Plasmonic Bubble Nucleation and Growth in Water: Effect of Dissolved Air

2019· article· en· W2970478592 on OpenAlexafffund
Xiaolai Li, Yuliang Wang, Mikhail E. Zaytsev, Guillaume Lajoinie, Hai Le The, Johan G. Bomer, Jan C. T. Eijkel, Harold J. W. Zandvliet, Xuehua Zhang, Detlef Lohse

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser-Ablation Synthesis of Nanoparticles
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilCanada First Research Excellence FundNatural Science Foundation of Beijing MunicipalityNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsNucleationBubbleChemical physicsWater vaporRADIUSDiffusionMaterials scienceThermodynamicsChemistryChemical engineeringMechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Under continuous laser irradiation, noble metal nanoparticles immersed in water can quickly heat up, leading to the nucleation of so-called plasmonic bubbles. In this work, we want to further understand the bubble nucleation and growth mechanism. In particular, we quantitatively study the effect of the amount of dissolved air on the bubble nucleation and growth dynamics, both for the initial giant bubble, which forms shortly after switching on the laser and is mainly composed of vapor, and for the final life phase of the bubble, during which it mainly contains air expelled from water. We found that the bubble nucleation temperature depends on the gas concentration: the higher the gas concentration, the lower the bubble nucleation temperature. Also, the long-term diffusion-dominated bubble growth is governed by the gas concentration. The radius of the bubbles grows as R ( t ) ∝ t 1/3 for air-equilibrated and air-oversaturated water. In contrast, in partially degassed water, the growth is much slower since, even for the highest temperature we achieve, the water remains undersaturated.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations51
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry CSame topicLaser-Ablation Synthesis of NanoparticlesFrench-language works237,207