| Title |
Entropy-driven formation of large icosahedral colloidal clusters by spherical confinement
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Materials, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1038/nmat4072 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bart de Nijs, Simone Dussi, Frank Smallenburg, Johannes D. Meeldijk, Dirk J. Groenendijk, Laura Filion, Arnout Imhof, Alfons van Blaaderen, Marjolein Dijkstra |
| Abstract |
Icosahedral symmetry, which is not compatible with truly long-range order, can be found in many systems, such as liquids, glasses, atomic clusters, quasicrystals and virus-capsids. To obtain arrangements with a high degree of icosahedral order from tens of particles or more, interparticle attractive interactions are considered to be essential. Here, we report that entropy and spherical confinement suffice for the formation of icosahedral clusters consisting of up to 100,000 particles. Specifically, by using real-space measurements on nanometre- and micrometre-sized colloids, as well as computer simulations, we show that tens of thousands of hard spheres compressed under spherical confinement spontaneously crystallize into icosahedral clusters that are entropically favoured over the bulk face-centred cubic crystal structure. Our findings provide insights into the interplay between confinement and crystallization and into how these are connected to the formation of icosahedral structures. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| India | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 380 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 5 | 1% |
| Hong Kong | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 358 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 117 | 31% |
| Researcher | 65 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 48 | 13% |
| Professor | 24 | 6% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 23 | 6% |
| Other | 49 | 13% |
| Unknown | 54 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 91 | 24% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 85 | 22% |
| Materials Science | 70 | 18% |
| Engineering | 32 | 8% |
| Chemical Engineering | 19 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 4% |
| Unknown | 69 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 November 2014.
All research outputs
#17,726,563
of 22,763,032 outputs
Outputs from Nature Materials
#3,722
of 3,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,303
of 236,954 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Materials
#52
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,763,032 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,965 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 32.4. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 236,954 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.