MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414105635 · doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2025.120831

Electrospinning for electromagnetic interference shielding: Principles, challenges, and future directions

2025· article· en· W4414105635 on OpenAlexafffund
Navid Keshmiri, Parisa Najmi, Abbas S. Milani, Mohammad Arjmand

Bibliographic record

VenueCarbon · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectromagnetic wave absorption materials
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEMIElectrospinningElectromagnetic shieldingElectromagnetic interferenceWearable computerElectrical conductorShieldsJet (fluid)Scalability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrospinning is an electrohydrodynamic process in which a liquid droplet is electrified to generate a charged jet that undergoes stretching and elongation to form fibers. This technique is widely recognized for fabricating nonwoven wearable textiles, with promising applications in electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding for healthcare and military systems. Effective EMI shields depend largely on electrical conductivity; however, electrospinning faces significant challenges when processing conductive materials due to excessive charge dissipation, jet instability, and unintended electrospraying instead of fiber formation. Here, we critically examine these challenges to elucidate the relationship between electrical conductivity and electrospinnability, identifying key bottlenecks in the field. Additionally, the recent progress in transitioning from reflection-based electrospun EMI shields to absorption-dominant ones is discussed in detail. Finally, we outline future directions that include strategies for absorption-dominant shielding, highlight the synergistic potential of electrospinning and electrospraying for scalable production, and advocate for the integration of machine learning tools to accelerate the design of next-generation EMI shielding materials. This review aims to bridge the gap between fundamental research and real-world applications, addressing critical challenges and paving the way toward high-performance, wearable EMI shielding technologies.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations14
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCarbonSame topicElectromagnetic wave absorption materialsFrench-language works237,207