MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416891422 · doi:10.1002/cjce.70184

Experimental methods in chemical engineering: Electrospinning

2025· article· en· W4416891422 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
M. Olga Guerrero‐Pérez, Tugce N. Eran, Gregory S. Patience

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersMinisterio de Educación y Formación ProfesionalPolytechnique Montréal
KeywordsElectrospinningPolymerField (mathematics)Hazardous wasteForcing (mathematics)Core (optical fiber)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Electrospinning produces micro‐ and nanofibres by forcing a polymeric solution through a fine needle in an electric field that produces a filament that accumulates onto a collector plate. The fibre morphology depends on solution properties, distance between needle and plate, feed rate, and electric field intensity. Membranes, films, capsules, and multilayer fibres are possible by introducing multiple needles, changing the plate configuration, moving the plate, or intermittent feeding. Its versatility, simplicity, and low‐cost has accelerated the adoption of this technology for adsorbents, catalysts, membranes, gas separation, electronic devices, electrodes in supercapacitors, drug delivery, and nanomedicine/tissue engineering. Since 1997, Web of Science Core Collection has indexed over 40,000 articles with electrospinning as a keyword in the ‘Topic’ search field. Multidisciplinary materials science, polymer science, nanoscience nanotechnology, and applied physics are the scientific disciplines that publish the most articles related to electrospinning, while chemical engineering is ranked 10th. The main clusters of research are: (1) membranes, fibres, polymer morphology, and medical type applications (scaffolds, drug delivery, antimicrobial); (2) nanoparticles/composites, photocatalysis, and graphene; (3) membranes, ultrafiltration, desalination, and carbon nanotubes; and, (4) waste water treatment, adsorption, and heavy metals. Here we highlight research conducted over the past decades and remaining challenges, including developing industrial scale‐up guidance, replacing/reducing hazardous and costly solvents, and devising theoretical models to determine optimal operating parameters.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.013

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
GenreMethods

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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering→Same topicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications→French-language works237,207→