MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400033838 · doi:10.1126/sciadv.adn3289

Scalable weaving of resilient membranes with on-demand superwettability for high-performance nanoemulsion separations

2024· article· en· W4400033838 on OpenAlexaff
Yangyang Wang, Luis Francisco Villalobos, Lijun Liang, Bo Zhu, Jian Li, Chen Chen, Yunxiang Bai, Chunfang Zhang, Liangliang Dong, Quan‐Fu An, Hong Meng, Yue Zhao, Menachem Elimelech

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Advances · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSurface Modification and Superhydrophobicity
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
KeywordsWeavingMembraneScalabilityMaterials scienceNanotechnologyWettingComputer scienceOn demandProcess engineeringComposite materialEngineeringChemistryMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study leverages the ancient craft of weaving to prepare membranes that can effectively treat oil/water mixtures, specifically challenging nanoemulsions. Drawing inspiration from the core-shell architecture of spider silk, we have engineered fibers, the fundamental building blocks for weaving membranes, that feature a mechanically robust core for tight weaving, coupled with a CO 2 -responsive shell that allows for on-demand wettability adjustments. Tightly weaving these fibers produces membranes with ideal pores, achieving over 99.6% separation efficiency for nanoemulsions with droplets as small as 20 nm. They offer high flux rates, on-demand self-cleaning, and can switch between sieving oil and water nanodroplets through simple CO 2 /N 2 stimulation. Moreover, weaving can produce sufficiently large membranes (4800 cm 2 ) to assemble a module that exhibits long-term stability and performance, surpassing state-of-the-art technologies for nanoemulsion separations, thus making industrial application a practical reality.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience AdvancesSame topicSurface Modification and SuperhydrophobicityFrench-language works237,207