Silver Meshes for Record-Performance Transparent Electromagnetic Interference Shielding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a simulation and experimental study of silver meshes to determine their performance for transparent electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding. Simulations were employed to study the effects of the silver mesh's width, pitch, and thickness on EMI shielding efficiency (SE) in the 8-18 GHz frequency range and transparency in the visible spectrum. We demonstrate a scalable, facile fabrication method that involves embedding meshes in glass by etching trenches in glass and filling and curing reactive particle-free silver ink in these trenches. Our silver meshes achieve 58.4 dB EMI SE with 83% visible light transmission and 48.3 dB EMI SE with 90.3% visible transmission. The combination of high-conductivity silver, small widths (1.3 to 5 μm), and large thicknesses (0.5 to 2.0 μm) enables the best performance of metal meshes as well as single-sided shielding materials for transparent EMI shielding, as reported in the literature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".