Progress in Bioinspired Dry and Wet Gradient Materials from Design Principles to Engineering Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nature does nothing in vain. Through millions of years of revolution, living organisms have evolved hierarchical and anisotropic structures to maximize their survival in complex and dynamic environments. Many of these structures are intrinsically heterogeneous and often with functional gradient distributions. Understanding the convergent and divergent gradient designs in the natural material systems may lead to a new paradigm shift in the development of next-generation high-performance bio-/nano-materials and devices that are critically needed in energy, environmental remediation, and biomedical fields. Herein, we review the basic design principles and highlight some of the prominent examples of gradient biological materials/structures discovered over the past few decades. Interestingly, despite the anisotropic features in one direction (i.e., in terms of gradient compositions and properties), these natural structures retain certain levels of symmetry, including point symmetry, axial symmetry, mirror symmetry, and 3D symmetry. We further demonstrate the state-of-the-art fabrication techniques and procedures in making the biomimetic counterparts. Some prototypes showcase optimized properties surpassing those seen in the biological model systems. Finally, we summarize the latest applications of these synthetic functional gradient materials and structures in robotics, biomedical, energy, and environmental fields, along with their future perspectives. This review may stimulate scientists, engineers, and inventors to explore this emerging and disruptive research methodology and endeavors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".