MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238342604 · doi:10.1063/1.4895779.4

10.1063/1.4895779.4

2014· dataset· en· W4238342604 on OpenAlex

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

VenueDefault Digital Object Group · 2014
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSurface Modification and Superhydrophobicity
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrop (telecommunication)WettingMaterials scienceSubstrate (aquarium)Sessile drop techniqueLiquid dropSurface energyContact angleNanotechnologyComposite materialOptoelectronicsMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study of wetting characteristics of low-energy (e.g., superhydrophobic) liquid-repellent surfaces is of great importance towards optimal design of such micro/nano-engineered surfaces. The most common technique to accomplish this involves bringing a drop generated at the needle-tip close to the characterizing substrate with a goal to deposit it on the substrate, which often becomes a challenge when the surface energy of the drop-substrate combination is comparable to the needle-drop system. In this paper, we proposed a new “needle-free” drop deposition technique, which overcomes this challenge for characterization the low-energy substrates. This is achieved by placing an additional low-energy substrate above the characterizing substrate and allowing the drop-needle combination to impact on this additional substrate. This technique is not only independent of the wetting properties of the needle and the characterizing substrate but is also independent of the liquid drop properties, thereby making it a very universal technique for characterizing substrate in air medium.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.105

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.225 · 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