MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408389173 · doi:10.1021/cbmi.4c00101

Impact of Droplet Wettability on Scanning Electrochemical Cell Microscopy Performance in Stainless Steels

2025· article· en· W4408389173 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarah R. Yassine, León Zendejas Medina, Egor Katkov, Robert Lacasse, Janine Mauzeroll

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical & Biomedical Imaging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCorrosion Behavior and Inhibition
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecMcGill University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaVetenskapsrådetHydro-Québec
KeywordsWettingMaterials scienceScanning electrochemical microscopyElectrochemistryScanning electron microscopeMicroscopyMetallurgyContact angleComposite materialNanotechnologyChemical engineeringElectrodeChemistryOpticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Variations in droplet wettability affect localized corrosion during scanning electrochemical cell microscopy (SECCM) on stainless steel. The droplet dynamics are influenced by stainless-steel microstructural features and surface conditions-such as surface roughness, inclusions, and the addition of an oil layer. As opposed to previous work on aluminum alloys, droplet spreading is promoted by oil immersion, which leads to an increase in the cathodic currents. Rougher surfaces hinder droplet spreading, largely due to the droplet pinning effect, and exhibit higher pitting corrosion incidences compared to smoother surfaces. Moreover, the presence of inclusions intensifies pitting initiation and constrains the landing area (droplet size). We report that while the landing area does not affect the number of metastable pits, small landing areas lead to a high probability of stable pitting.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical & Biomedical ImagingSame topicCorrosion Behavior and InhibitionFrench-language works237,207