Multiscale modelling of magnetostatic effects on magnetic nanoparticles with application to hyperthermia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We extend a renormalization group-based (RG) coarse-graining method for micromagnetic simulations to include properly scaled magnetostatic interactions. We apply the method in simulations of dynamic hysteresis loops at clinically relevant sweep rates and at 310 K of iron oxide nanoparticles (NPs) of the kind that have been used in preclinical studies of magnetic hyperthermia. The coarse-graining method, along with a time scaling involving sweep rate and Gilbert damping parameter, allow us to span length scales from the unit cell to NPs approximately 50 nm in diameter with reasonable simulation times. For both NPs and the nanorods composing them, we report effective uniaxial anisotropy strengths and saturation magnetizations, which differ from those of the bulk materials magnetite and maghemite of which they are made, on account of the combined non-trivial effects of temperature, inter-rod exchange, magnetostatic interactions and the degree of orientational order within the nanorod composites. The effective parameters allow treating the NPs as single macrospins, and we find for the test case of calculating loops for two aligned NPs that using the dipole approximation is sufficient for distances beyond 1.5 times the NP diameter. We also present a study on relating integration time step to micromagnetic cell size, finding that the optimal time step size scales approximately linearly with cell volume.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".