MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Versatile Snail-Inspired Superamphiphobic Coatings with Repeatable Adhesion and Recyclability

2020· dataset· en· W3125800032 on OpenAlexaff
Zhenqiang Zhang, Danfeng Yu, Xiubin Xu, Hui Yang, Ian Wyman, Jinben Wang, Xu Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueAuthorea · 2020
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Science and Technology Planning Project
KeywordsMaterials scienceAdhesionNanotechnologyCoatingNanomaterialsAdhesiveRigidity (electromagnetism)Composite materialLayer (electronics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Superamphiphobic surfaces with extreme repellency toward both water and oily liquids have been developed from various nanocomposites with fluorinated compounds. However, the inherent rigidity and low-surface-energy of these composites restrict their adhesion and practical application in adjusting the surface wettabilities of materials. Here we report a strategy to create hybrid superamphiphobic coating with rapid contact adhesion to various kinds of substrates, strong and controllable adhesive strength, unprecedented capability of mechanical deformations, facile removal, repeatable adhesion, and simple recyclization. Our approach, inspired by snail's ideal combination of hard shell and soft epiphragm, is versatile and industrially-viable because we use the hydrogel primer to bond the fluorinated nanoparticle finish and substrates. Considering the unique characteristics of these coatings as well as the wide range of available hydrogels and nanomaterials that can be used via this approach, we envision that this snail-inspired strategy will facilitate the development and large-scale production of superamphiphobic coatings.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.027

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAuthoreaSame topicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface InteractionsFrench-language works237,207