MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309005197 · doi:10.1007/s12274-022-5053-4

Recent progress and perspective in additive manufacturing of EMI shielding functional polymer nanocomposites

2022· article· en· W4309005197 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

VenueNano Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectromagnetic wave absorption materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceElectromagnetic shieldingEMINanocompositeConductive polymerElectronicsFabricationElectrical conductorCarbon nanotubeNanotechnologyElectromagnetic interferenceSupercapacitorPolymerComposite materialElectrical engineeringCapacitanceEngineeringElectrode

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Because of rapid progress in the electronics industry, the market has faced a huge demand for novel materials in the field of electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding. Conductive functional polymer composites have demonstrated great potential to fulfill this requirement. To synthesize the polymeric composites, functional conductive nanoadditives such as graphene, carbon nanotubes, and MXene are commonly added to polymeric matrices, and the conductive polymer nanocomposites exhibit promising electrical conductivity as well as EMI shielding performance. Additive manufacturing (AM), also referred to as three-dimensional (3D) printing, has been increasingly employed to fabricate complicated geometry components in the medical, aerospace, and automotive industries. AM has also been used to fabricate advanced EMI shielding materials for sensors, supercapacitors, energy storage devices, and flexible electronics. This review aims at introducing the different 3D printing methods applied for the fabrication of EMI shielding polymer nanocomposites. The impact of the AM process on the functionality of the samples is also reviewed. Additionally, the influence of the nanofiller type and amount on the microstructure and performance of the fabricated nanocomposites is discussed. Finally, the prospects and recommended works for future study are outlined.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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)0.0070.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.289 · 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