↓ Skip to main content

Solid State Pathways to Complex Shape Evolution and Tunable Porosity during Metallic Crystal Growth

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Solid State Pathways to Complex Shape Evolution and Tunable Porosity during Metallic Crystal Growth
Published in
Scientific Reports, September 2013
DOI 10.1038/srep02642
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlos Díaz Valenzuela, Gabino A. Carriedo, María L. Valenzuela, Luis Zúñiga, Colm O'Dwyer

Abstract

Growing complex metallic crystals, supported high index facet nanocrystal composites and tunable porosity metals, and exploiting factors that influence shape and morphology is crucial in many exciting developments in chemistry, catalysis, biotechnology and nanoscience. Assembly, organization and ordered crystallization of nanostructures into complex shapes requires understanding of the building blocks and their association, and this relationship can define the many physical properties of crystals and their assemblies. Understanding crystal evolution pathways is required for controlled deposition onto surfaces. Here, complex metallic crystals on the nano- and microscale, carbon supported nanoparticles, and spinodal porous noble metals with defined inter-feature distances in 3D, are accomplished in the solid-state for Au, Ag, Pd, and Re. Bottom-up growth and positioning is possible through competitive coarsening of mobile nanoparticles and their site-specific crystallization in a nucleation-dewetted matrix. Shape evolution, density and growth mechanism of complex metallic crystals and porous metals can be imaged during growth.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 6%
United States 1 3%
Unknown 30 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 33%
Student > Master 6 18%
Researcher 5 15%
Other 3 9%
Professor 1 3%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 2 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Materials Science 14 42%
Engineering 6 18%
Chemistry 4 12%
Physics and Astronomy 3 9%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 2 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 March 2018.
All research outputs
#7,663,424
of 12,713,955 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#31,788
of 59,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,516
of 157,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#4
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,713,955 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 59,515 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.4. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 157,542 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.