MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313596131 · doi:10.1002/sia.7190

A mechanochemically created durable <i>dynamic</i> superhydrophilic‐ <i>like</i> surface

2023· article· en· W4313596131 on OpenAlexaff
Yan Zhu, Wenbo Li, De‐Quan Yang, E. Sacher

Bibliographic record

VenueSurface and Interface Analysis · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSurface Modification and Superhydrophobicity
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalRegroupement Québécois sur les Matériaux de Pointe
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuperhydrophilicitySandpaperWettingContact angleMaterials scienceImmersion (mathematics)Composite materialPolyethylene terephthalateAbrasion (mechanical)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Superhydrophilicity (superwettability) is generally defined as either a static water contact angle near 0° or water completely wetting the surface. Here, we show that there is a superhydrophilic‐ like surface that has a large static water contact angle but demonstrates superhydrophilicity in its dynamic water contact performance. We found that polyethylene terephthalate (PET) surfaces showed such behavior following mechanical abrasion with sandpaper. We have evaluated the wettability of the abraded PET surfaces by using static water contact angle (SWCA) measurements and the dynamic water contact performance (DWCP) of impacting droplets, the latter including water sprays, water immersion, anti‐fogging and water droplet impact tests. The water was found to completely wet the abraded PET surfaces on spraying or immersion, although the measured SWCA was as high as 70°, similar to that of the unabraded PET surface. For the abraded PET surface, both the water layer thickness on water immersion and the subsequent drying time were similar to those of an especially coated superhydrophilic layer on the unabraded surface. Accordingly, superhydrophilicity may be determined by the process used to measure it.

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 score0.004

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSurface and Interface AnalysisSame topicSurface Modification and SuperhydrophobicityFrench-language works237,207