MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294877973 · doi:10.1088/2058-8585/ac8f58

Highly sensitive and fully printable humidity sensor on a flexible substrate based on a zinc oxide and polyethylenimine composite

2022· article· en· W4294877973 on OpenAlexaff
Fatemeh Samaeifar, Mohsen Azadinia, Atefeh Ghorbani, Junfei Chen, Mathieu Gratuze, Mohsen Ketabi, Ricardo Izquierdo, Hany Aziz

Bibliographic record

VenueFlexible and Printed Electronics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGas Sensing Nanomaterials and Sensors
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials sciencePolyethylenimineComposite numberFourier transform infrared spectroscopyLayer (electronics)Relative humiditySubstrate (aquarium)AdsorptionChemical engineeringScanning electron microscopeAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Composite materialChemistryChromatographyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We report a highly sensitive and fully printable capacitive humidity sensor based on a zinc oxide (ZnO) and polyethylenimine (PEI) composite. The sensor has a simple structure, consisting only of a layer of the ZnO:PEI composite, coated using an ethanol solution, on a layer of silver inter-digital electrodes that have been pre-printed on a polyethyleneterephthalate substrate. The sensor with ZnO:PEI in the ratio of 2:1 by volume exhibits a response of 43 907 000% at maximum humidity, with a detection range of 15%–95% relative humidity, higher than other sensors fully made by wet-coating processes. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, atomic force microscopy, and scanning electron microscopy measurements suggest that the high response likely arises from the use of a hydrophilic polymer with a high dipole moment which facilitates dipole-dipole interactions with water molecules and from the highly granular morphology of the composite which leads to a high surface-to-volume ratio and more-numerous water adsorption sites. The fabricated sensor also demonstrates short response/recovery times (5 s/3 s), good repeatability over multiple humidification and desiccation cycles, and only 5% loss in response after being kept in the ambient for three weeks.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFlexible and Printed ElectronicsSame topicGas Sensing Nanomaterials and SensorsFrench-language works237,207