MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091741220 · doi:10.1109/lsens.2020.3023702

Boron Nitride Nanotubes for Optical Fiber Chemical Sensing Applications

2020· article· en· W3091741220 on OpenAlexaff
Huimin Ding, Jingwen Guan, Ping Lü, Stephen J. Mihailov, Christopher T. Kingston, Benoît Simard

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Sensors Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicDiamond and Carbon-based Materials Research
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceBoron nitrideAcetoneChemical engineeringTetrahydrofuranFiberNanomaterialsSelectivityOptical fiberFiber optic sensorSurface modificationNanotechnologyOrganic chemistryComposite materialSolventChemistryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Boron nitride nanotubes (BNNTs) are 1-D hollow fibrous nanomaterials. They are thermally stable up to 800 °C in open air and up to 1000 °C in a pure chlorine atmosphere, are electrically insulating, and possess superlative mechanical properties. Since the BNNT assembly is highly porous and easily penetrated by liquids and gases, BNNT thin film coated on optical fiber can be used as a novel sensing medium with enhanced sensitivity and selectivity. In this letter, uniform BNNT films have been successfully coated on optical fibers and tapered optical fibers (TOFs). A BNNT-coated TOF sensor has been developed for various liquids and gases sensing applications. We demonstrated experimentally that the BNNT-coated TOF can be used as a level sensor for liquids, even for those with refractive indices smaller than that of silica such as the organic solvents like acetone, hexane, tetrahydrofuran, ethyl ether, and dimethylformamide. As to gas sensing, HCl was selectively detected with enhanced sensitivity due to its high polarity and good affinity to the OH/NH2 functionalized BNNTs. The BNNT-coated optical fiber sensors can be potentially used at high temperatures and in some harsh environments.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Sensors LettersSame topicDiamond and Carbon-based Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207