Exploring the “Living” Growth of Block Copolymer Nanofibers from Surface-Confined Seeds by <i>In Situ</i> Solution-Phase Atomic Force Microscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Living crystallization-driven self-assembly of polymeric and molecular amphiphiles is of growing interest as a seeded growth route to uniform 1D, 2D, and more complex micellar nanoparticles with controlled dimensions and a range of potential applications. Although most studies have been performed using colloidally stable seeds in bulk solution, growth of block copolymer (BCP) nanofibers from seeds confined to a surface is attracting increased attention. Herein, we have used atomic force microscopy (AFM) to undertake detailed studies of the growth of BCP nanofibers from immobilized seeds located on a Si surface. Through initial ex situ AFM studies and in situ AFM video analysis in solution, we determined that growth occurred in four stages, whereby an initial surface-bound growth regime transitions to surface-limited growth. As the nanofiber length increases, surface influence is diminished as the newly grown micelle segment is no longer bound to the Si substrate. Finally, a surface-independent regime occurs where nanofiber growth continues into bulk solution. In addition to the anticipated nanofiber elongation, our studies revealed occasional examples of AFM tip-induced core fragmentation. In these cases, the termini of the newly formed fragments were also active to further growth. Furthermore, unidirectional growth was detected in cases where the seed was oriented at a significant angle with respect to the surface, thereby restricting unimer access to one terminus.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".