MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979077560 · doi:10.1115/1.2019-sep2

What’s the Deal with Graphene?

2019· article· en· W2979077560 on OpenAlexaff
R.P. Siegel

Bibliographic record

VenueMechanical Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphene research and applications
Canadian institutionsNovelis (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrapheneScale (ratio)Risk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceNanotechnologyManufacturing engineeringEngineeringMaterials scienceBusinessPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In spite of its wondrous laboratory-scale properties, engineers have been hesitant to incorporate graphene into their mission-critical designs. There is still a lot that is not known about this material, including, how much of an environmental and health risk will it pose. A number of products and prototypes have failed to meet expectations. Some manufacturers, however, are starting to produce graphene at scale and edging into limited uses for the material in applications as diverse as touch screens and auto parts. This study delves into the current status and future of graphene.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.010
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.005

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMechanical EngineeringSame topicGraphene research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207