Interaction energies in nematic liquid crystal suspensions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We establish, as $ρ\to 0$, an asymptotic expansion for the minimal Dirichlet energy of $\mathbb S^2$-valued maps outside a finite number of three-dimensional particles of size $ρ$ with fixed centers $x_j\in\mathbb{R}^3$, under general anchoring conditions at the particle boundaries. Up to a scaling factor, this expansion is of the form \begin{align*} E_ρ= \sum_j μ_j -4πρ\sum_{i\neq j} \frac{\langle v_i,v_j\rangle}{|x_i-x_j|} +o(ρ)\,, \end{align*} where $μ_j$ is the minimal energy after zooming in at scale $ρ$ around each particle, and $v_j\in\mathbb{R}^3$ is a torque determined by the far-field behavior of the corresponding single-particle minimizer. The above expansion highlights Coulomb-like interactions between the particle centers. This agrees with the \textit{electrostatics analogy} commonly used in the physics literature for colloid interactions in nematic liquid crystal. That analogy was pioneered by Brochard and de Gennes in 1970, based on a formal linearization argument. We obtain here for the first time a precise estimate of the energy error introduced by this linearization procedure.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".