MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401621970 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25452

The use of artificial intelligence in liquid crystal applications: A review

2024· review· en· W4401621970 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Sarah Chattha, Philip K. Chan, Simant R. Upreti

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicLiquid Crystal Research Advancements
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) have significantly influenced scientific discovery and analysis, including liquid crystals. This paper reviews the use of AI in predicting the properties of liquid crystals and improving their sensing applications. Typically, liquid crystals are utilized as sensors in biomedical detection and diagnostics, and in the detection of heavy metal ions and gases. Traditional methods of analysis used in these applications are often subjective, expensive, and time‐consuming. To surmount these challenges, AI methods such as convolutional neural networks (CNN) and support vector machines (SVM) have been recently utilized to predict liquid crystal properties and improve the resulting performance of the sensing applications. Large amounts of data are, however, required to fully realize the potential of AI methods, which would also need adequate ethical oversight. In addition to experiments, modelling approaches utilizing first principles as well as AI may be employed to supplement and furnish the data. In summary, the review indicates that AI methods hold great promise in the further development of the liquid crystal technology.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicLiquid Crystal Research AdvancementsFrench-language works237,207