MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307475305 · doi:10.1145/3526113.3545623

Prototyping Soft Devices with Interactive Bioplastics

2022· article· en· W4307475305 on OpenAlexaff
Marion Koelle, Madalina Nicolae, Aditya Shekhar Nittala, Marc Teyssier, Jürgen Steimle

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInteractive and Immersive Displays
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsBioplasticComputer scienceRapid prototypingEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Designers and makers are increasingly interested in leveraging bio-based and bio-degradable ‘do-it-yourself’ (DIY) materials for sustainable prototyping. Their self-produced bioplastics possess compelling properties such as self-adhesion but have so far not been functionalized to create soft interactive devices, due to a lack of DIY techniques for the fabrication of functional electronic circuits and sensors. In this paper, we contribute a DIY approach for creating Interactive Bioplastics that is accessible to a wide audience, making use of easy-to-obtain bio-based raw materials and familiar tools. We present three types of conductive bioplastic materials and their formulation: sheets, pastes and foams. Our materials enable additive and subtractive fabrication of soft circuits and sensors. Furthermore, we demonstrate how these materials can substitute conventional prototyping materials, be combined with off-the-shelf electronics, and be fed into a sustainable material ‘life-cycle’ including disassembly, re-use, and re-melting of materials. A formal characterization of our conductors highlights that they are even on-par with commercially available carbon-based conductive pastes.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations73
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInteractive and Immersive DisplaysFrench-language works237,207