MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200147547 · doi:10.1002/mame.202100368

Nanofibers Fabrication by Blown‐Centrifugal Spinning

2021· article· en· W4200147547 on OpenAlex
Seyed Shahaboddin Ayati, Mehdi Karevan, Evan Stefanek, Mohammed Bhia, Mohsen Akbari

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecular Materials and Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpinningMaterials scienceSurface tensionFabricationAirflowBody orificeFiberViscosityNanofiberComposite materialCentrifugal forceViscous fingeringVolumetric flow rateEvaporationFlow (mathematics)MechanicsPorosityThermodynamicsMechanical engineeringPorous medium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Here, a new, simple, and effective fabrication method of random and aligned nanofibers by utilizing centrifugal spinning and solution blowing is shown. This process, termed blown‐centrifugal spinning (BCS), capitalizes on a rotating reservoir and uses high velocity expanding gas to extrude fibers. The polymer solution is injected from the orifice of the reservoir and is brought in contact with the airflow on the reservoir's surface. The fiber morphology bears a relationship with airflow rate, solution viscosity, surface tension, and solvent evaporation rate. Fiber formation in the flowing stream is controlled by dynamic pressures, surface tension, and viscous forces.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.185 · 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