MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408290503 · doi:10.1039/d5sm00006h

Recent advances in nanoprecipitation: from mechanistic insights to applications in nanomaterial synthesis

2025· review· en· W4408290503 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSoft Matter · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser-Ablation Synthesis of Nanoparticles
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Innovates
KeywordsNanotechnologyNanomaterialsPerspective (graphical)Materials scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nanoprecipitation is a versatile, low-energy technique for synthesizing nanomaterials through controlled precipitation, enabling precise tuning of material properties. This review offers a comprehensive and up-to-date perspective on nanoprecipitation, focusing on its role in nanoparticle synthesis and its adaptability in designing diverse nanostructures. The review begins with the foundational principles of nanoprecipitation, emphasizing the impact of key parameters such as flow rate, mixing approach, injection rate, and Reynolds number on nanomaterial characteristics. It also discusses the influence of physicochemical factors, including solvent choice, polymer type, and drug properties. Various nanoprecipitation configurations-batch, flash, and microfluidic are examined for their specific advantages in controlling particle size, morphology, and internal structure. The review further explores the potential of nanoprecipitation to create complex nanostructures, such as core-shell particles, Janus nanoparticles, and porous and semiconducting polymer nanoparticles. Applications in biomedicine and other fields highlight nanoprecipitation's promise as a sustainable and tunable method for fabricating advanced nanomaterials. Finally, the review identifies future directions, including scaling microfluidic techniques, expanding compatibility with hydrophilic compounds, and integrating machine learning to further enhance the development of nanoprecipitation.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.254 · 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