Migration of magnetic microparticles through a liquid–liquid interface under an external magnetic field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Liquid–liquid interfaces play a pivotal role in various microfluidic processes involving microparticles, including coating, dissolution, controlled release of polyelectrolytes or drugs, and self-assembly processes. In all of these cases, noninvasive techniques to manipulate the microparticle transport are essential. Magnetic manipulation offers an accessible and straightforward means of controlling the motion of magnetic particles within microfluidic devices. Magnetic microparticles are commonly used for conformal polyelectrolyte coating and drug encapsulation by passing them through a liquid–liquid interface due to their high saturation magnetization, stability, and low toxicity. In this work, we draw inspiration from the lack of studies on the behavior of magnetic particles near a liquid–liquid interface under conditions of low Reynolds numbers and high capillary action, despite its engineering relevance in microfluidic systems. We consider a canonical flow configuration in which particle motion is driven by the stagnation-point flow that is generated when two different liquids flow toward one another. We show how the operating conditions dictate whether the particle will pierce the interface and become coated or not and illustrate this via parameter-space plots. We use the results of this analysis to understand how the operating conditions influence the fraction of particles that pass through the liquid–liquid interface and are conformally coated, which may be used to guide a variety of industrial processes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".