MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044026916 · doi:10.1080/08927022.2020.1797020

Melting of alkane nanocrystals: towards a representation of polyethylene

2020· article· en· W3044026916 on OpenAlexafffund
Azar Shamloo, Denis Rodrigue, Armand Soldera

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Simulation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMaterial Dynamics and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsMaterials scienceNanocrystalCrystallizationThermodynamicsEnthalpy of fusionMolecular dynamicsAlkaneAmorphous solidMelting pointCrystal (programming language)EnthalpyFusionChemical physicsNanotechnologyCrystallographyChemistryComputational chemistryPhysicsHydrocarbon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To simulate macroscopic properties at the molecular level, interfaces must be represented the most efficiently. In the study reported in this article, we use molecular dynamics (MD) simulation to reveal the impact of the environment around nanocrystals constituted of alkane chains on the melting temperature. The Gibbs-Thomson law was used to compare different simulated systems and experimental data. Based on thermodynamics argument, this law discloses the linear relationships between the melting, or crystallisation, temperature and the inverse of the crystal thickness. The crystal edges of simulated nanocrystals and the alkane chain length have been varied. For each nanocrystal, a simulated melting temperature (Tm) was obtained and reported with respect to the crystal thickness. The simulated enthalpy of fusion (Δhm), surface (σe) and lateral (σ) free energies were thus extracted. All these properties have been compared to experimental data, and to properties stemming from nanocrystals in empty space. It is shown that nanocrystals surrounded by amorphous chains lead to values that agree better experimental data showing the great improvement in the model.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular SimulationSame topicMaterial Dynamics and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207