MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3173826505 · doi:10.3390/mi12070773

Smart Textiles for Visible and IR Camouflage Application: State-of-the-Art and Microfabrication Path Forward

2021· review· en· W3173826505 on OpenAlexafffund
Lauren M. Degenstein, Dan Sameoto, James D. Hogan, Asad Asad, Patricia I. Dolez

Bibliographic record

VenueMicromachines · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersMinistère de la Défense Nationale
KeywordsCamouflageMicrofabricationTextileSmart materialComputer scienceNanotechnologySystems engineeringMaterials scienceFabricationEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Protective textiles used for military applications must fulfill a variety of functional requirements, including durability, resistance to environmental conditions and ballistic threats, all while being comfortable and lightweight. In addition, these textiles must provide camouflage and concealment under various environmental conditions and, thus, a range of wavelengths on the electromagnetic spectrum. Similar requirements may exist for other applications, for instance hunting. With improvements in infrared sensing technology, the focus of protective textile research and development has shifted solely from providing visible camouflage to providing camouflage in the infrared (IR) region. Smart textiles, which can monitor and react to the textile wearer or environmental stimuli, have been applied to protective textiles to improve camouflage in the IR spectral range. This study presents a review of current smart textile technologies for visible and IR signature control of protective textiles, including coloration techniques, chromic materials, conductive polymers, and phase change materials. We propose novel fabrication technology combinations using various microfabrication techniques (e.g., three-dimensional (3D) printing; microfluidics; machine learning) to improve the visible and IR signature management of protective textiles and discuss possible challenges in terms of compatibility with the different textile performance requirements.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.261
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations76
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicromachinesSame topicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting MaterialsFrench-language works237,207