MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4328050801 · doi:10.1088/2053-1591/acc63e

Electromagnetic interference shielding in lightweight carbon xerogels

2023· article· en· W4328050801 on OpenAlexafffund
Biporjoy Sarkar, Floriane Miquet‐Westphal, Sanyasi Rao Bobbara, Ben George, Giovanni Beltrame, David Dousset, Ke Wu, Fabio Cicoira

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials Research Express · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectromagnetic wave absorption materials
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsMaterials scienceElectromagnetic shieldingEMIElectromagnetic interferenceResorcinolPorosityCarbon fibersComposite materialAbsorption (acoustics)TelecommunicationsComputer scienceChemistryComposite number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract With the increasing use of high-frequency electronic and wireless devices, electromagnetic interference (EMI) has become a growing concern due to its potential impact on both electronic devices and human health. In this study, we demonstrated the performance of lightweight, electrically conducting 3D resorcinol-formaldehyde carbon xerogels, of 2.4 mm thickness, as an EMI shieldin the frequency range of 10–15 GHz (X-Ku band). The brittle carbon xerogels revealed complex porous structures with irregularly shaped pores that were randomly distributed. Electrochemical characterization revealed that the material behaved as an electrical double-layer capacitor. The carbon xerogels displayed reflection-dominated (∼ 84%) shielding behavior, with a total EMI shielding effectiveness (SE) value of ∼ 61 dB. The absorption process also contributed (∼ 16%) to the total SE. This behavior is attributed to the carbon xerogels' complex porous network, which effectively suppresses EM waves.

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials Research ExpressSame topicElectromagnetic wave absorption materialsFrench-language works237,207