↓ Skip to main content

Chemical and entropic control on the molecular self-assembly process

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Chemical and entropic control on the molecular self-assembly process
Published in
Nature Communications, February 2017
DOI 10.1038/ncomms14463
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel M. Packwood, Patrick Han, Taro Hitosugi

Abstract

Molecular self-assembly refers to the spontaneous assembly of molecules into larger structures. In order to exploit molecular self-assembly for the bottom-up synthesis of nanomaterials, the effects of chemical control (strength of the directionality in the intermolecular interaction) and entropic control (temperature) on the self-assembly process should be clarified. Here we present a theoretical methodology that unambiguously distinguishes the effects of chemical and entropic control on the self-assembly of molecules adsorbed to metal surfaces. While chemical control simply increases the formation probability of ordered structures, entropic control induces a variety of effects. These effects range from fine structure modulation of ordered structures, through to degrading large, amorphous structures into short, chain-shaped structures. Counterintuitively, the latter effect shows that entropic control can improve molecular ordering. By identifying appropriate levels of chemical and entropic control, our methodology can, therefore, identify strategies for optimizing the yield of desired nanostructures from the molecular self-assembly process.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 60 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 25%
Student > Master 15 25%
Researcher 12 20%
Professor 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 6 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 25 41%
Materials Science 11 18%
Engineering 5 8%
Physics and Astronomy 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Other 11 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 72. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 December 2018.
All research outputs
#240,505
of 13,615,267 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#4,440
of 24,759 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,526
of 350,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,615,267 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,759 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 47.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 350,275 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them