Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 35 references

Elimination of Extreme Boundary Scattering via Polymer Thermal Bridging in Silica Nanoparticle Packings: Implications for Thermal Management

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Filling the air gaps between silica nanoparticles with polystyrene eliminates the boundary scattering that suppresses heat flow, and the filled composite conducts better than either ingredient alone.

desk verdict Credible, counterintuitive measurement of polymer thermal bridging in silica NP films, with a needed model typo fix and missing error bars. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.03258 v1 pith:UHMTX4OB submitted 2019-08-08 cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.app-ph

Brian F. Donovan , Ronald J. Warzoha , R. Bharath Venkatesh , Nicholas T. Vu , Jay Wallen , Daeyeon Lee This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.app-ph PACS 66.70.-f44.10.+i
keywords thermalconductivitysilicananoparticlepackingpolystyreneinfiltrationboundaryscatteringminimumeffectivemediumvibrationalbridgingfrequency-domainthermoreflectance
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Disordered packings of amorphous silica nanoparticles conduct far less heat than bulk silica, and this paper sets out to identify the cause and to test what happens when the air gaps are filled with polystyrene. It argues that the dominant resistance is strong boundary scattering at the vacuum-exposed surfaces of the nanoparticles, not the intrinsic disorder of the silica itself. Infiltrating the voids with polystyrene switches that scattering off, so the composite's thermal conductivity from 80 K to 300 K is captured by a simple effective-medium average of polymer and silica with the boundary term removed and no adjustable parameters. The composite ends up conducting more heat than either constituent alone, which suggests that interstitial stiffness can be used to tune heat flow in disordered solids for thermal management.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the nanoparticle boundary scattering time $\tau_{NP} = \alpha d / v$, where $d$ is the nanoparticle diameter, $v$ the sound speed, and $\alpha$ the boundary transmission factor; $\alpha = 1$ means boundaries transmit heat freely, while the fitted $\alpha \approx 0.03$ for the bare packing describes surfaces that are almost thermally isolated. The paper combines this with the minimum-limit scattering time $\tau_{min} = \omega/\pi$ through Matthiessen's rule, which adds the scattering rates, inside a Debye-model integral over vibrational frequencies, giving the thermal conductivity of each constituent, and then mixes the constituents with the effective medium rule $\kappa_{tot} = V_{poly}\kappa_{poly} + V_{NP}\kappa_{NP}$. The mechanism that carries the argument is vibrational bridging: polystyrene in the interstices coats the nanoparticles and replaces vacuum gaps with polymer contacts, which the model represents by setting $\alpha = 0$, so the silica returns to its intrinsic minimum-limit conductivity and the composite follows the zero-parameter effective medium curve.

What would settle it

A decisive experiment is to measure the composite thermal conductivity of identical silica packings with the same polymer fill but two different nanoparticle diameters: the paper's elimination model predicts no diameter dependence once the boundary term is removed, whereas any polymer-silica contact resistance would make smaller particles conduct worse; a clear drop with decreasing diameter would falsify the zero-interface-resistance assumption.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the measured 300 K conductivity of the bare disordered silica nanoparticle film, 0.53 W/m·K, lies well below the roughly 1.2 W/m·K of bulk silica and below what the minimum-limit model predicts, requiring an additional scattering term $\tau_{NP} = \alpha d / v$ with $\alpha \approx 0.03$. When polystyrene fills the interstices by capillary rise infiltration (drawing the polymer into the pores by capillary action), the composite conductivity exceeds both constituents, and the effective medium rule $\kappa_{tot} = V_{poly}\kappa_{poly} + V_{NP}\kappa_{NP}$ captures the 80–300 K data only when this nanoparticle boundary scattering term is removed ($\alpha = 0$), using the intrinsic minimum-limit conductivity of silica. The paper's interpretation is that the polymer acts as a vibrational bridge: it replaces vacuum-exposed nanoparticle surfaces with polymer-contacted surfaces, reinstating heat flow that the isolated nanoparticle boundaries had suppressed. This is contrary to the ordinary expectation that adding a low-conductivity polymer to a low-conductivity packing would lower or leave unchanged the overall conductivity.

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes that once polystyrene fills the voids, the only effect is removal of the vacuum gap—that the polymer-silica contacts themselves add no resistance to heat flow and that the silica's intrinsic conductivity is unchanged; if those contacts do resist heat flow, or infiltration alters the silica, the zero-parameter agreement could be a coincidence.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Polymer infiltration can turn an ultra-low-conductivity disordered nanoparticle film into a film that conducts better than either the polymer or the silica alone, which standard effective medium theory with bulk constituent values does not predict.
  • Even partial polymer fill raises the composite conductivity immediately, because any polymer addition coats the nanoparticles and provides the vibrational bridge; this matches the paper's model and earlier observations of polymer coating at low fill fractions.
  • Nanostructuring can reduce thermal conductivity below the amorphous minimum-limit value when nanoparticles are thermally isolated, and removing that isolation restores minimum-limit behavior.
  • Interstitial stiffness becomes a design parameter: choosing a polymer, or tuning it through its glass transition, should let thermal conductivity be adjusted between the isolated-nanoparticle value and the bridged composite value.
  • For thermal management, empty voids are useful for insulation while a stiff interstitial bridge is useful for heat spreading in disordered nanoparticle films such as optical coatings and solar-thermal desalination layers.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A testable extension would vary the stiffness of the interstitial polymer: if the bridging is vibrational, a soft or rubbery polymer should produce a smaller conductivity jump than polystyrene at the same fill fraction, whereas the paper's simple elimination picture with $\alpha = 0$ does not discriminate between polymer stiffnesses.
  • If polymer-silica contact resistance matters at all, the composite conductivity should fall as nanoparticle diameter decreases because interface area per volume grows; measuring the same polymer fill at two or three particle sizes would separate contact resistance from pure boundary-scattering elimination.
  • The paper's partial-fill data suggest a near-zero threshold for the conductivity jump; mapping the jump versus fill fraction with finer steps and correlating it with polymer neck coverage could reveal whether the bridging effect is percolation-like or smooth.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports frequency-domain thermoreflectance (FDTR) measurements of thermal conductivity from 80 K to 300 K for three thin-film systems: disordered packings of amorphous silica nanoparticles, polystyrene films, and capillary-rise-infiltrated polystyrene/silica composite films. The authors model the bare nanoparticle film with a Debye-based minimum-limit model modified by Matthiessen's rule to include an additional nanoparticle boundary-scattering term tau_NP = alpha*d/v, fit alpha = 0.03, and then claim that the same model with alpha = 0 provides a zero-parameter effective-medium description of the composite via kappa_tot = V_poly*kappa_poly + V_NP*kappa_NP. From this they conclude that interstitial polymer eliminates the extreme boundary scattering in the disordered nanoparticle packing, increasing the composite conductivity above either constituent.

Significance. If correct, the result is significant: it provides a direct experimental demonstration that the dominant thermal resistance in disordered amorphous nanoparticle packings is boundary-related rather than intrinsic, and that infiltration of a low-conductivity polymer can markedly increase the overall conductivity. The qualitative increase in measured conductivity upon polymer infiltration is a direct observation, and the material system usefully isolates the boundary-scattering contribution. The quantitative support, however, currently rests on a model whose printed equations contain at least one dimensional error, and whose central 'zero-parameter' claim is weaker than stated. The paper does not include error bars on the extracted conductivities, a reproducibility artifact, or a treatment of interfacial (Kapitza) resistance, all of which are needed to make the elimination-of-boundary-scattering interpretation robust.

major comments (3)
  1. [Minimum-limit model, Eq. (6)] The printed intrinsic scattering time is tau_min = omega/pi, which has units of inverse time, not time. The standard minimum-limit form in the cited Cahill/Pohl literature is tau_min = pi/omega. If Eq. (6) is implemented literally, the scattering rate 1/tau_min becomes pi/omega, giving unphysically long lifetimes at high frequencies and an integrand in Eq. (5) that cannot yield the known low thermal conductivity of bulk a-SiO2 or polystyrene. This is a load-bearing issue because both the bare-film fit (alpha = 0.03) and the headline composite curve (alpha = 0) are evaluated using this intrinsic term. The formula must be corrected and a reproducibility artifact (code or tabulated model curves) provided so that the reported alpha values and the Fig. 4 composite curve can be independently verified.
  2. [Fig. 4 and the 'zero fitting parameters' claim] The statement that the composite model captures the data 'without any fitted parameters' overstates its inferential status. The parameter alpha is first fitted to the bare nanoparticle film, and the alpha = 0 curve is then chosen because it matches the composite data; setting alpha to zero is informed by the measurement being explained. The model has zero adjustable parameters only at the final evaluation step, not as a prior prediction. Please report the temperature dependence of the residuals for the alpha = 0.03 fit and the alpha = 0 composite curve, and rephrase the claim to distinguish a parameter-free evaluation from a parameter-free prediction.
  3. [Eq. (8) and the effective-medium interpretation] The central conclusion that polymer infiltration 'eliminates' nanoparticle boundary scattering assumes that the polymer-silica interfaces themselves contribute negligible thermal resistance and that the intrinsic conductivity of the silica is unchanged by infiltration. The model does not include a polymer-silica Kapitza conductance term, so the agreement of the alpha = 0 effective-medium curve could also arise from a finite interfacial conductance that happens to produce a similar temperature dependence over 80-300 K. A concrete test would be to include an interface conductance term in the effective medium or to measure the composite series with different nanoparticle diameters, for which the alpha = 0 prediction makes a falsifiable prediction.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Figs. 4 and 5] No error bars or uncertainty bands are shown for the FDTR-extracted thermal conductivities; the paper describes the transducer-thickness uncertainty but does not propagate it to kappa. Please add confidence intervals or state the estimated uncertainty for each data point.
  2. [Eq. (1)] The silica volume fraction is obtained from a linear refractive-index mixing rule, n = n_silica*phi_silica + n_air*(1-phi_silica). At phi = 0.65, a Maxwell-Garnett or Bruggeman effective-medium expression would be more defensible for a dense random packing; please justify the linear form or bound the resulting uncertainty in phi.
  3. [Throughout] There are typos and wording issues, including 'Mathiesenn's rule' (should be Matthiessen's rule), 'intercallated' (intercalated), and 'instrinsically' (intrinsically). The abstract's phrase 'stiff interstitial material' is also misleading because polystyrene is much less stiff than silica; 'mechanically continuous' or 'well-bonded' would better convey the intended idea.
  4. [Experimental Details / FDTR fitting] The paper leaves the transducer-film interfacial conductance G and volumetric heat capacity C_v as free parameters in the FDTR fit but does not report their fitted values or uncertainties. Given that the sensitivity to G is said to be low, please quantify this insensitivity so that the reader can assess the influence of these unknowns on the reported kappa values.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Minor circularity: the 'zero-parameter' composite curve is obtained by deleting the only fitted parameter, a model-selection step informed by the same composite data.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Paragraph after Fig. 4 (pp. 12-13 of preprint), under 'To further understand these effects...']
    "If we focus on the model used to fit for the silica nanoparticle thermal conductivity and use it in the effective medium calculation approach with the additional scattering from the nanoparticle boundaries removed (i.e. removing the only fitted parameter in this model, α) we find that we capture the composite film data without any fitted parameters and the system can be described by an effective medium of the polymer and SiO2 with no nanoparticle scattering."

    The model's only free parameter is α, fitted to the bare nanoparticle film (α=0.03). The composite 'prediction' is produced by setting α=0, i.e., by deleting the boundary-scattering term. That deletion is not derived from an independent physical input; it is chosen after observing that the composite data exceed both constituents and are matched only by the α=0 effective-medium curve. The curve is therefore a data-informed model selection, not a parameter-free out-of-sample prediction. The central claim 'polymer eliminates boundary scattering' is effectively the same assumption used to build the successful curve, so the agreement confirms the assumption rather than testing it independently.

full rationale

The core experimental observation is not circular: FDTR measures a real increase in composite conductivity, and the composite curve is not obtained by fitting to those data. Volume fractions, sound speeds, and heat capacities are literature/dimensional inputs, and the CaRI/FDTR methods are externally anchored. The only significant circular aspect is the construction of the composite 'prediction': it is the same modified Debye effective-medium model with the sole fitted parameter α set to zero, a choice that is motivated by the observed composite behavior. This is a mild fitted-input-called-prediction step and a model-selection overstatement rather than a full reduction of the central claim. The apparent typo τmin=ω/π (dimensionally inverse time) is a correctness/reproducibility problem, not a circularity, and is not counted in the score. No load-bearing self-citation or imported uniqueness theorem was found; self-citations to prior CaRI and thermoreflectance work are methodological and verifiable.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a small number of standard assumptions: the Debye minimum-limit model, Matthiessen's rule, a literature form for nanoparticle boundary scattering, and a simple effective medium without interface resistance. The paper introduces no new physical entities. The main model-dependent assumption is that the polymer eliminates boundary scattering entirely (alpha = 0), which is the interpretation being tested rather than an independently established input. The FDTR extraction parameters are included for completeness but do not affect the physical model's free-parameter count.

free parameters (4)
  • alpha (nanoparticle boundary transmission factor) = 0.03
    Fitted to the bare silica nanoparticle film's 300 K thermal conductivity to reproduce the reduction below bulk amorphous SiO2 (Eq. 7 and Fig. 4). It is the only adjustable parameter in the thermal model; the composite model sets it to zero.
  • Film thermal conductivity kappa (FDTR fit output) = e.g., 0.53 W/m·K for bare NP film at 300 K
    Central measured quantity; extracted by fitting the multilayer thermal model to frequency-domain thermoreflectance phase data with kappa, C_v, and interface conductance G as free parameters.
  • Volumetric heat capacity C_v (FDTR fit output) = Within 8% of literature constituent values
    Left free in the FDTR fit to check sensitivity; not used as an adjustable parameter in the physical conduction model.
  • Transducer-film interfacial conductance G (FDTR fit output) = Not reported
    Left free in the FDTR fit; authors state that the fitted thermal conductivity values are not significantly affected by it.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Debye model and minimum thermal conductivity limit describe amorphous silica and polystyrene
    Eq. 5 with tau_min = omega/pi assumes linear dispersion, a Debye density of states, and that amorphous silica and polystyrene are described by Cahill's lower limit to thermal conductivity.
  • standard math Matthiessen's rule holds for combining intrinsic, film, and nanoparticle boundary scattering
    Eq. 6 sums inverse scattering times for intrinsic, film-boundary, and nanoparticle-boundary scattering; assumes independent scattering mechanisms.
  • domain assumption Nanoparticle boundary scattering time has the form tau_NP = alpha*d/v
    Eq. 7 adopts this form from Wang et al.; assumes the dominant boundary effect scales linearly with particle diameter and a constant transmission factor alpha.
  • domain assumption Effective medium weighted average without an interface resistance term is valid
    Eq. 8 assumes the composite conductivity is a volume-weighted average of intrinsic polymer and silica conductivities with no polymer-silica interface resistance.
  • domain assumption Polymer fully fills the void network and coats all nanoparticle surfaces
    The analysis uses V_poly = 0.35 and V_NP = 0.65 based on ellipsometry, thickness balance, and SEM; assumes complete void infiltration and constant particle volume fraction.
  • domain assumption Polymer infiltration eliminates nanoparticle boundary scattering, represented by setting alpha = 0 in the composite model
    The zero-parameter composite prediction requires setting the nanoparticle boundary scattering term to zero; this is the central physical interpretation rather than an independently measured quantity.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Elimination of Extreme Boundary Scattering via Polymer Thermal Bridging in Silica Nanoparticle Packings: Implications for Thermal Management." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UHMTX4OB

@misc{pith2026190803258,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Elimination of Extreme Boundary Scattering via Polymer Thermal Bridging in Silica Nanoparticle Packings: Implications for Thermal Management},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UHMTX4OB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.03258}
}
read the original abstract

Recent advances in our understanding of thermal transport in nanocrystalline systems are responsible for the integration of new technologies into advanced energy systems, including thermoelectric refrigeration systems and renewable energy platforms. However, there is little understanding of heat energy transport mechanisms that govern the thermal properties of disordered nanocomposites. In this work, we explore thermal transport mechanisms in disordered packings of amorphous nanoparticles with and without a polymer filling the interstices in order to quantify the impact of thermal boundary scattering introduced at nanoparticle edges in an already amorphous system and within the context of a minimum thermal conductivity approximation. By fitting a modified minimum thermal conductivity model to temperature-dependent measurements of thermal conductivity from 80 K to 300 K, we find that the interstitial polymer {\it eliminates} boundary scattering in the disordered nanoparticle packing, which surprisingly leads to an {\it increase} in the overall thermal conductivity of the disordered nanoparticle thin-film composite. This is contrary to our expectations relative to effective medium theory and our understanding of a minimum thermal conductivity limit. Instead, we find that a stiff interstitial material improves the transmission of heat through a nanoparticle boundary, improving the thermal properties of disordered nanoparticle packing. We expect these results to provide insight into the tunability of thermal properties in disordered solids that exhibit already low thermal conductivities through the use of nanostructuring and vibrational thermal bridging.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.03258 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic illustrating the capillary rise infiltration (CaRI) method. A polymer film is [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a and b) Cross-sectional SEM images of the nanoparticle packings before infiltration. (c [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Frequency-phase plots for Silicon (upper left), 108 nm polystyrene on Si (upper right), [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Measured thermal conductivity of the 100 nm polymer film (blue circles), 600 nm SiO [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Measured thermal conductivity with varying polymer fill percentages (maximum fill is [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    J.; Fleischer, A

    Warzoha, R. J.; Fleischer, A. S. Heat Flow at Nanoparticle Interfaces. Nano Energy 2014, 6, 137–158

    work page 2014

  2. [2]

    Modified Effective Medium Formulation for the Thermal Conductivity of Nanocomposites

    Minnich, A.; Chen, G. Modified Effective Medium Formulation for the Thermal Conductivity of Nanocomposites. Applied Physics Letters 2007, 91, 073105

    work page 2007

  3. [3]

    Effect of Percolation on Thermal Transport in Nanotube Composites

    Kumar, S.; Alam, M.; Murthy, J. Effect of Percolation on Thermal Transport in Nanotube Composites. Applied Physics Letters 2007, 90, 104105

    work page 2007

  4. [4]

    J.; Fleischer, A

    Warzoha, R. J.; Fleischer, A. S. Effect of Graphene Layer Thickness and Mechanical Com- pliance on Interfacial Heat Flow and Thermal Conduction in Solid–Liquid Phase Change Materials. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2014, 6, 12868–12876

    work page 2014

  5. [5]

    Thermal Percolation in Stable Graphite Suspensions

    Zheng, R.; Gao, J.; Wang, J.; Feng, S.-P.; Ohtani, H.; Wang, J.; Chen, G. Thermal Percolation in Stable Graphite Suspensions. Nano Letters 2011, 12, 188–192

    work page 2011

  6. [6]

    F.; King, D

    Hakim, L. F.; King, D. M.; Zhou, Y.; Gump, C. J.; George, S. M.; Weimer, A. W. Nanoparticle Coating for Advanced Optical, Mechanical and Rheological Properties. Advanced Functional Materials 2007, 17, 3175–3181

    work page 2007

  7. [7]

    Xia, D.; Biswas, A.; Li, D.; Brueck, S. R. Directed Self-Assembly of Silica Nanoparticles into Nanometer-Scale Patterned Surfaces using Spin-Coating. Advanced Materials 2004, 16, 1427–1432

    work page 2004

  8. [8]

    The Effect of SiO2 Nanoparticles on Morphol- ogy and Performance of Thin Film Composite Membranes for Forward Osmosis Application

    Niksefat, N.; Jahanshahi, M.; Rahimpour, A. The Effect of SiO2 Nanoparticles on Morphol- ogy and Performance of Thin Film Composite Membranes for Forward Osmosis Application. Desalination 2014, 343, 140–146

    work page 2014

Show all 35 references
  1. [9]

    Enhanced Thermal Conductivity of Metallic Nanoparticle Packed Bed by Sintering Treatment

    Lin, Z.-Z.; Huang, C.-L.; Zhen, W.-K.; Huang, Z. Enhanced Thermal Conductivity of Metallic Nanoparticle Packed Bed by Sintering Treatment. Applied Thermal Engineering 2017, 119, 425–429

    2017

  2. [10]

    P.; Mulhearn, W

    Chan, E. P.; Mulhearn, W. D.; Huang, Y.-R.; Lee, J.-H.; Lee, D.; Stafford, C. M. Tailoring the Permselectivity of Water Desalination Membranes via Nanoparticle Assembly. Langmuir 2014, 30, 611–616

    2014

  3. [11]

    G.; Watson, S

    Cahill, D. G.; Watson, S. K.; Pohl, R. O. Lower Limit to the Thermal Conductivity of Disor- dered Crystals. Physical Review B 1992, 46, 6131

    1992

  4. [12]

    E.; Mittal, M.; Phinney, L

    Hopkins, P. E.; Mittal, M.; Phinney, L. M.; Grillet, A. M.; Furst, E. M. Ultra-Low Ther- 21 mal Conductivity of Ellipsoidal TiO 2 Nanoparticle Films. Applied Physics Letters 2011, 99, 133106

    2011

  5. [13]

    Ordering Up the Minimum Thermal Conductivity of Solids

    Goodson, K. Ordering Up the Minimum Thermal Conductivity of Solids. Science 2007, 315, 342–343

    2007

  6. [14]

    Precise Control of Thermal Conductivity at the Nanoscale through Individual Phonon-Scattering Barriers

    Pernot, G.; Stoffel, M.; Savic, I.; Pezzoli, F.; Chen, P.; Savelli, G.; Jacquot, A.; Schumann, J.; Denker, U.; M¨ onch, I. Precise Control of Thermal Conductivity at the Nanoscale through Individual Phonon-Scattering Barriers. Nature Materials 2010, 9, 491

    2010

  7. [15]

    F.; Foley, B

    Donovan, B. F.; Foley, B. M.; Ihlefeld, J. F.; Maria, J.-P.; Hopkins, P. E. Spectral Phonon Scattering Effects on the Thermal Conductivity of Nano-Grained Barium Titanate. Applied Physics Letters 2014, 105, 082907

    2014

  8. [16]

    E.; Jang, W.; Garay, J

    Wang, Z.; Alaniz, J. E.; Jang, W.; Garay, J. E.; Dames, C. Thermal Conductivity of Nanocrys- talline Silicon: Importance of Grain Size and Frequency-Dependent Mean Free Paths. Nano Letters 2011, 11, 2206–2213

    2011

  9. [17]

    J.; Giri, A.; Warzoha, R.; Donovan, B

    Szwejkowski, C. J.; Giri, A.; Warzoha, R.; Donovan, B. F.; Kaehr, B.; Hopkins, P. E. Molecular Tuning of the Vibrational Thermal Transport Mechanisms in Fullerene Derivative Solutions. ACS Nano 2017, 11, 1389–1396

    2017

  10. [18]

    Heat Conduction Tuning by Wave Nature of Phonons

    Maire, J.; Anufriev, R.; Yanagisawa, R.; Ramiere, A.; Volz, S.; Nomura, M. Heat Conduction Tuning by Wave Nature of Phonons. Science Advances 2017, 3, e1700027

    2017

  11. [19]

    K.; Cheaito, R.; Rossen, P

    Ravichandran, J.; Yadav, A. K.; Cheaito, R.; Rossen, P. B.; Soukiassian, A.; Suresha, S.; Duda, J. C.; Foley, B. M.; Lee, C.-H.; Zhu, Y. Crossover from Incoherent to Coherent Phonon Scattering in Epitaxial Oxide Superlattices. Nature Materials 2014, 13, 168

    2014

  12. [20]

    L.; Gupta, R.; Zhang, L.; Stebe, K

    Huang, Y.-R.; Jiang, Y.; Hor, J. L.; Gupta, R.; Zhang, L.; Stebe, K. J.; Feng, G.; Turner, K. T.; Lee, D. Polymer Nanocomposite Films with Extremely High Nanoparticle Loadings via Cap- illary Rise Infiltration (CaRI). Nanoscale 2015, 7, 798–805

    2015

  13. [21]

    L.; Jiang, Y.; Ring, D

    Hor, J. L.; Jiang, Y.; Ring, D. J.; Riggleman, R. A.; Turner, K. T.; Lee, D. Nanoporous Polymer-Infiltrated Nanoparticle Films with Uniform or Graded Porosity via Undersaturated Capillary Rise Infiltration. ACS Nano 2017, 11, 3229–3236

    2017

  14. [22]

    L.; Lee, D.; Turner, K

    Jiang, Y.; Hor, J. L.; Lee, D.; Turner, K. T. Toughening Nanoparticle Films via Polymer Infiltration and Confinement. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2018, 10, 44011–44017

    2018

  15. [23]

    H.; Brugarolas, T.; Lee, S.; Nolte, A

    Prosser, J. H.; Brugarolas, T.; Lee, S.; Nolte, A. J.; Lee, D. Avoiding Cracks in Nanoparticle Films. Nano Letters 2012, 12, 5287–5291. 22

    2012

  16. [24]

    Characterization of voids in spherical particle systems by Delaunay empty spheres

    R´ emond, S.; Gallias, J.; Mizrahi, A. Characterization of voids in spherical particle systems by Delaunay empty spheres. Granular Matter 2008, 10, 329–334

    2008

  17. [25]

    J.; Cheaito, R.; Chiesa, M

    Schmidt, A. J.; Cheaito, R.; Chiesa, M. A Frequency-Domain Thermoreflectance Method for the Characterization of Thermal Properties. Review of Scientific Instruments 2009, 80, 094901

    2009

  18. [26]

    minimum limit

    and the Experimental Details section at the end of the manuscript. We use an analytical model for the thermal conductivity based on a Debye assumption to capture the thermo-physical mechanisms that drive heat flow within the CaRI composite film made of disordered silica nanopart...

  19. [27]

    J.; Donovan, B

    Sharar, D. J.; Donovan, B. F.; Warzoha, R. J.; Wilson, A. A.; Leff, A. C.; Hanrahan, B. M. Solid-State Thermal Energy Storage Using Reversible Martensitic Transformations. Applied Physics Letters 2019, 114, 143902

    2019

  20. [28]

    Introduction to Solid State Physics ; Wiley New York, 1976; Vol

    Kittel, C.; McEuen, P.; McEuen, P. Introduction to Solid State Physics ; Wiley New York, 1976; Vol. 8

    1976

  21. [29]

    Interpretation of the Thermal Conductivity of Glasses

    Kittel, C. Interpretation of the Thermal Conductivity of Glasses. Physical Review 1949, 75, 972

    1949

  22. [30]

    Proctor, T. M. Sound Speed Measurements in Solids:Absolute Accuracy of an Improved Tran- sient Pulse Method. Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards - C. Engineering and Instrumentation 1971, 75C

    1971

  23. [31]

    incompressible

    Mott, P.; Dorgan, J.; Roland, C. The bulk modulus and Poisson’s ratio of “incompressible” materials. Journal of Sound and Vibration 2008, 312

    2008

  24. [32]

    P.; Turney, J.; McGaughey, A

    Sellan, D. P.; Turney, J.; McGaughey, A. J.; Amon, C. H. Cross-Plane Phonon Transport in Thin Films. Journal of Applied Physics 2010, 108, 113524

    2010

  25. [33]

    G.; Pohl, R

    Cahill, D. G.; Pohl, R. O. Thermal Conductivity of Amorphous Solids Above the Plateau. Physical Review B 1987, 35, 4067

    1987

  26. [34]

    E.; Kaehr, B.; Piekos, E

    Hopkins, P. E.; Kaehr, B.; Piekos, E. S.; Dunphy, D.; Jeffrey Brinker, C. Minimum Thermal Conductivity Considerations in Aerogel Thin Films. Journal of Applied Physics 2012, 111, 113532

    2012

  27. [35]

    L.; Szwejkowski, C

    Braun, J. L.; Szwejkowski, C. J.; Giri, A.; Hopkins, P. E. On the Steady-State Temperature Rise During Laser Heating of Multilayer Thin Films in Optical Pump–Probe Techniques. Journal of Heat Transfer 2018, 140, 052801. 23

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.