MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193095722 · doi:10.1002/adfm.202103268

Shape‐Memory Photonic Thermoplastics from Cellulose Nanocrystals

2021· article· en· W3193095722 on OpenAlexafffund
Charlotte E. Boott, Miguel A. Soto, Wadood Y. Hamad, Mark J. MacLachlan

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Functional Materials · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicLiquid Crystal Research Advancements
Canadian institutionsFPInnovationsFirst Quantum Minerals (Canada)University of British Columbia
FundersKillam TrustsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
KeywordsMaterials scienceLiquid crystalShape-memory polymerShape-memory alloyNanocrystalPhotonicsComposite materialMonomerGlass transitionHydroxypropyl celluloseCelluloseStructural colorationPolymerThermoplasticPhotonic crystalOptoelectronicsNanotechnologyChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Responsive materials prepared using shape‐memory photonic crystals have potential applications in rewritable photonic devices, security features, and optical coatings. By embedding chiral nematic cellulose nanocrystals (CNCs) in a polyacrylate matrix, a shape‐memory photonic crystal thermoplastic (CNC‐SMP) allows reversible capture of different colored states is reported. In this system, the temperature is used to program the shape‐memory response, while pressure is used to compress the helical pitch of the CNC chiral nematic organization. By increasing the force applied (≈140–230 N), the structural color can be tuned from red to blue. Then, on‐demand, the CNC‐SMP can recover to its original state by heating it above the glass transition temperature. This cycle can be performed over 15 times without any loss of the shape‐memory behavior or mechanical degradation of the sample. In addition, multicolor readouts can be programmed into the chiral nematic CNC‐SMP by using a patterned substrate to press the sample, while the glass transition temperature of the CNC‐SMP can be tuned over a 90 °C range by altering the monomer composition used to prepare the polyacrylate matrix.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.000

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.

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 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
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

Citations61
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Functional MaterialsSame topicLiquid Crystal Research AdvancementsFrench-language works237,207