Gallium-based liquid metals as smart responsive materials: Morphological forms and stimuli characterization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gallium-based liquid metals (GaLMs) have garnered monumental attention from the scientific community due to their diverse actuation characteristics. These metals possess remarkable characteristics, including high surface tension, excellent electrical and thermal conductivity, phase transformation behaviour, minimal viscosity and vapour pressure, lack of toxicity, and biocompatibility. In addition, GaLMs have melting points that are either lower or near room temperature, making them incredibly beneficial when compared to solid metals since they can be easily deformed. Thus, there has been significant progress in developing multifunctional devices using GaLMs, including bio-devices, flexible and self-healing circuits, and actuators. Despite numerous reports on these liquid metals (LMs), there is an urgent need for consolidated and coherent literature regarding their actuation principles linked to the targeted application. This will ensure that the reader gets the flavour of physics behind the actuation mechanism and how it can be utilized in diverse fields. Moreover, the actuation mechanism has been scattered in the literature, and thus, the primary motive of this review is to provide a one-stop solution for the actuation mechanism and the associated dynamics while directing the readers to specialized literature. Thus, addressing this issue, we thoroughly examine and present a detailed account of the actuation mechanisms of GaLMs while highlighting the science behind them. We also discuss the various morphologies of GaLMs and their crucial physical characteristics which decide their targeted application. Furthermore, we also delve into commonly held beliefs about GaLMs in the literature, such as their toxicity and antibacterial properties, to offer readers a more accurate understanding. Finally, we have explored several key unanswered aspects of the LM that should be explored in future research. The core strength of this review lies in its simplistic approach in offering a starting point for researchers venturing this innovative field, while we make use of existing literature to develop a comprehensive understanding.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".