MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214910044 · doi:10.1002/cplu.202200026

Manipulating the Self‐Assembly of Multicomponent Low Molecular Weight Gelators (LMWGs) through Molecular Design

2022· article· en· W4214910044 on OpenAlexafffund
Jeanette N. Loos, Francesco D’Acierno, Urmi Vijay Mody, Mark J. MacLachlan

Bibliographic record

VenueChemPlusChem · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSupramolecular Self-Assembly in Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersWestern Economic Diversification CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsSimon Fraser University
KeywordsSelf-assemblyNanotechnologyChemistryMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multicomponent low molecular weight gelators (LMWGs) may self-assemble by co-assembly (CA), social self-sorting (SSS), or narcissistic self-sorting (NSS). Understanding the nuances of the self-assembly processes is important to predict the behavior of multicomponent organogels. Here, we investigate the effect of molecular structure on self-assembly in a series of amino-acid based bicomponent LMWGs that differ in headgroup and alkyl chain length. Packing preference of the organogels was determined using differential scanning calorimetry, nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy and small angle X-ray scattering. From 66 bicomponent samples we found 50 CA, 14 SSS and 2 NSS. Furthermore, we performed statistical analysis to investigate the role of hydrophobicity and chain length on the overall pathway of self-assembly for these systems. We found the hydrophobicity of the headgroup strongly affected the assembly preference of the organogel, but alkyl chain length only played a small role.

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 score0.000
Threshold uncertainty score0.001

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemPlusChemSame topicSupramolecular Self-Assembly in MaterialsFrench-language works237,207