MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412798435 · doi:10.14356/kona.2026016

Perspectives: Past, Present, and Future Developments in Particle Science and Technology

2025· article· en· W4412798435 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony J. Hickey, C. C. Huang, Anil Misra, Vasanthakumar Balasubramanian, Brij M. Moudgil, Anthony D. Rosato, Luís Marcelo Tavares, Qiang Zhang, Wei‐Ning Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueKONA Powder and Particle Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCatalytic Processes in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersHosokawa Powder Technology Foundation
KeywordsMaterials scienceScience, technology and societyEngineering ethicsNanotechnologyEngineering physicsEngineeringSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Members of the American Editorial Board of the KONA Powder and Particle Journal recently convened to consider current and future perspectives in the fields of particle science and technology. This brief overview presents their observations regarding current and emerging areas of interest in select domains of particle and powder technologies. The major areas of practical significance identified were particle characterization, milling, granular material handling, scale-up considerations, and particle design strategies for environmental and pharmaceutical applications. An attempt has been made to highlight the role of artificial intelligence (AI)/machine learning (ML) in generating robust modeling and simulations for designing particle and powder systems for future process and product innovations.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.011
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKONA Powder and Particle JournalSame topicCatalytic Processes in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207