MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4301594521 · doi:10.1063/5.0090717

Exfoliation mechanisms of 2D materials and their applications

2022· article· en· W4301594521 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Reviews · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphene research and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsExfoliation jointMaterials scienceNanotechnologyContext (archaeology)GrapheneGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the strong in-plane but weak out-of-plane bonding, it is relatively easy to separate nanosheets of two-dimensional (2D) materials from their respective bulk crystals. This exfoliation of 2D materials can yield large 2D nanosheets, hundreds of micrometers wide, that can be as thin as one or a few atomic layers thick. However, the underlying physical mechanisms unique to each exfoliation technique can produce a wide distribution of defects, yields, functionalization, lateral sizes, and thicknesses, which can be appropriate for specific end applications. The five most commonly used exfoliation techniques include micromechanical cleavage, ultrasonication, shear exfoliation, ball milling, and electrochemical exfoliation. In this review, we present an overview of the field of 2D material exfoliation and the underlying physical mechanisms with emphasis on progress over the last decade. The beneficial characteristics and shortcomings of each exfoliation process are discussed in the context of their functional properties to guide the selection of the best technique for a given application. Furthermore, an analysis of standard applications of exfoliated 2D nanosheets is presented including their use in energy storage, electronics, lubrication, composite, and structural applications. By providing detailed insight into the underlying exfoliation mechanisms along with the advantages and disadvantages of each technique, this review intends to guide the reader toward the appropriate batch-scale exfoliation techniques for a wide variety of industrial applications.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.416

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.253 · 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