Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 47 references

Scaling laws for concentration-gradient-driven electrolyte transport through a 2D membrane

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper derives scaling laws for concentration-gradient-driven electrolyte flow, solute flux, and electric current through a circular aperture in an infinitesimally thin charged membrane, showing unusual fractional power-law dependence…

desk verdict First scaling laws for concentration-gradient-driven electrolyte transport through a 2D aperture, with solid Q and δJ scalings verified by FEM; but the derived thin-EDL δI scaling is contradicted by the paper's own simulations and replaced by an empirical fit. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.03781 v1 pith:4TFUOPN7 submitted 2024-12-05 cond-mat.soft physics.flu-dyn

Holly C. M. Baldock , David M. Huang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.softphysics.flu-dyn
keywords concentration-gradienttransportdiffusioosmosis2DmembranesnanoporeelectricdoublelayerDebye-Hückelregimescalinglawsosmoticpower
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

This paper derives general equations and scaling laws for what happens when a salt-concentration difference pushes a dilute electrolyte through a circular pore in an infinitesimally thin charged membrane—the geometry of a single-layer nanopore. The central finding is that the flow rate, the surface contribution to solute flux, and the surface electric current each follow clean power laws in the pore radius $a$, the surface charge density $\sigma$, and the Debye screening length $\lambda_D$, with different exponents in the thick- and thin-double-layer regimes. In the thick regime $Q \propto a^3 \sigma^2 \Delta\ln c$ and $\delta J \propto a \sigma^2 \Delta\ln c$; in the thin regime $Q \propto a \lambda_D^2 \sigma^2 \Delta\ln c$, $\delta J \propto (a\lambda_D)^{1/2} \sigma^2 \Delta\ln c$, and $\delta I \propto (a/\lambda_D)^{1/2} \sigma \Delta\ln c$. The paper verifies the $Q$ and $\delta J$ scalings with finite-element simulations and shows that the dimensionless fluxes collapse onto universal curves of $\lambda_D/a$. The significance is that 2D membranes behave differently from thick cylindrical pores—fractional power laws and a logarithmic dependence on the concentration ratio—which matters for osmotic power, desalination, and iontronic devices.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the equilibrium Debye–Hückel electric potential of a charged circular aperture, written in oblate-spheroidal coordinates where the pore is a disk (Eq. 34). The argument proceeds by a perturbation expansion in the small concentration difference: the non-equilibrium concentration profile is the harmonic solution $c_s \propto \tan^{-1}\nu$, the same form as for a neutral solute, and the electric body force is expressed through $\nabla\psi_0^2$. A reciprocal theorem converts the flow rate into an integral of the known pressure-driven velocity against that body force, while the solute flux and current are surface integrals of $\psi_0$ and $\psi_0^2$ over the pore mouth. The scaling laws come from approximating $\psi_0$ in the two limits: constant at the planar-surface value for thick double layers, and a step-function decay over $\lambda_D$ from the surface or pore edge for thin double layers.

What would settle it

Run a finite-element or full numerical calculation of $\delta I$ in the Debye–Hückel thin-double-layer regime using the exact equilibrium potential of the charged disk, with no step-function approximation, and compare the exponent of $\delta I$ versus $a/\lambda_D$; if it matches the simulations' $1/4$ rather than the paper's derived $1/2$, the derivation's pore-mouth potential idealization is the point of failure.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that concentration-gradient-driven electrolyte transport through a circular aperture in an infinitesimally thin, charged membrane can be captured by a first-principles continuum theory whose predictions reduce to explicit scaling exponents in the two Debye–Hückel limits. For $\lambda_D \gg a$ it finds $Q \propto a^3 \sigma^2 \Delta\ln c$, $\delta J \propto a \sigma^2 \Delta\ln c$, and $\delta I \propto a \sigma \lambda_D^{-1} \Delta\ln c$; for $\lambda_D \ll a$ it finds $Q \propto a \lambda_D^2 \sigma^2 \Delta\ln c$, $\delta J \propto (a\lambda_D)^{1/2} \sigma^2 \Delta\ln c$, and $\delta I \propto (a/\lambda_D)^{1/2} \sigma \Delta\ln c$. It further claims that these scalings, once non-dimensionalized, depend only on $\lambda_D/a$, hold for the flow rate and solute flux even outside the Debye–Hückel regime when the double layer is thin, and extend to arbitrary surface potentials through the Dukhin length and surface conductivity, giving $Q \propto \ln\sigma$ at high charge. The finite-element simulations confirm the flow-rate and solute-flux scalings; for the electric current the simulations yield $\delta I \propto (a/\lambda_D)^{1/4}$, which the paper incorporates into its final empirical scaling law rather than the derived $1/2$ power.

Load-bearing premise

The electric-current result in the thin-screening-layer regime rests on treating the membrane's electric potential inside the pore as decaying from the pore edge over the screening length; if that idealized decay is wrong, the predicted half-power scaling fails—and the paper's own simulations find a quarter-power scaling instead.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For pores much smaller than the Debye length, the flow rate grows as $a^3$ and the surface solute flux only as $a$, so reducing pore size suppresses 2D-membrane fluxes much more gently than in long cylindrical pores, where $Q \propto a^4/L$ and $\delta J \propto a^2/L$.
  • For thin double layers, the surface flux and current acquire fractional exponents: $\delta J \propto c_\infty^{-1/4}$ and $\delta I \propto c_\infty^{1/8}$ when bulk terms are negligible, a weak but nonzero salt-concentration dependence that thick-membrane theories lack.
  • The response is linear in $\Delta\ln c$ rather than $\Delta c$, so the transport coefficients are set by the logarithmic concentration ratio, reflecting that the interaction range (the Debye length) itself depends on salt concentration.
  • Outside the Debye–Hückel regime with non-overlapping double layers, the flow rate crosses over from $\sigma^2$ to $\ln\sigma$ scaling at high surface charge, $\delta J$ crosses from $\sigma^2$ to $\sigma$, and $\delta I$ remains linear in $\sigma$.
  • Entrance effects encoded in these 2D scalings can contribute to fractional power-law ionic conductance versus salt concentration seen in nanotube experiments, since pore-end resistance dominates when membrane thickness is comparable to or smaller than pore size.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the quarter-power current scaling survives in full Poisson–Nernst–Planck solutions, the electric current is controlled by a different feature of the pore-mouth potential than the solute flux, so a corrected theory would likely replace the local step-function potential with a nonlocal surface-conductance kernel.
  • A concrete experimental test would be measuring osmotic current versus salt concentration in single-layer MoS2 or graphene nanopores with known surface charge: the predicted $(a/\lambda_D)^{1/4}$ or $(a/\lambda_D)^{1/2}$ exponent is a distinguishable signature of the entrance-effect mechanism.
  • For salts with unequal cation and anion diffusivities, the paper's equations imply a contribution to $\delta I$ proportional to $(D_+-D_-)\sigma$ that can become significant at high surface charge, suggesting a possible route to ion-selective osmotic energy conversion that the paper does not develop.
  • Because the same aperture geometry controls pore-entrance resistance in thicker membranes, the derived scalings imply that fractional concentration dependence observed in nanotube and boron-nitride-nanotube conductance may partly be an entrance effect rather than a bulk property of the tube interior.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper derives scaling laws for concentration-gradient-driven electrolyte transport through a circular aperture in an infinitesimally thin charged membrane. Using a Debye–Hückel perturbation expansion and the reciprocal theorem, the authors obtain expressions for the flow rate Q, the surface contribution to the solute flux δJ, and the surface contribution to the electric current δI in the thick- and thin-EDL limits (Eqs. 35–43 and Table I), as well as heuristic extensions beyond the Debye–Hückel regime and a scaling law for electroosmotic flow. The theoretical results are compared with FEM simulations of KCl transport through 0.2 nm thick membranes over a range of pore radii, concentrations, and surface charge densities. The paper reports that the Q and δJ thin-EDL scalings and all thick-EDL scalings agree with simulations, while the δI thin-EDL scaling does not; the empirical exponent 1/4 is then adopted in Eq. (59) and in the supplementary material.

Significance. If fully validated, the paper would be a genuinely useful contribution: it provides the first systematic scaling analysis of diffusioosmotic electrolyte transport through 2D membranes, including a parameter-free Debye–Hückel reduction in which all dimensionless flux integrals depend only on λ_D/a, and a careful separation of bulk and surface contributions. The agreement between the derived Q and δJ scalings and independent FEM simulations is a real strength, as is the explicit comparison with neutral-solute and cylindrical-pore results. The paper is also transparent about many of its assumptions and validity conditions. However, the electric-current scaling in the thin-EDL limit is load-bearing for the abstract's claim that all derived scaling laws are verified, and that claim is not supported by the paper's own data. This is a correctable but substantive issue.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. IIIB, Fig. 4(c), Eq. (43)] The thin-EDL electric-current scaling is contradicted by the paper's own FEM data. Equation (43) predicts δI ∝ (a/λ_D)^{1/2}, which under the non-dimensionalization in Eq. (53) corresponds to δĨ ∝ (λ_D/a)^{3/2}; Fig. 4(c) and the text of Sec. IIIB instead report δĨ ∝ (λ_D/a)^{7/4} for λ_D/a ≤ 0.1 in the Debye–Hückel regime, i.e. δI ∝ (a/λ_D)^{1/4}. The paper does not explain this discrepancy; it introduces a power-law fit in Fig. 4(c) and then adopts the empirical exponent in Eq. (59) and Sec. SII. Because the abstract states that the derived scaling laws 'accurately capture the scaling relationships from finite-element numerical simulations within the Debye–Hückel regime,' this unvalidated exponent undermines a central claim and must be addressed by either deriving the observed exponent or explicitly reclassifying Eq. (59) as empirical.
  2. [Sec. IIA2, Eqs. (S3)–(S7), (40)–(43)] The derivation of Eq. (43) is not controlled in the thin-EDL limit, because it is based on the step-function approximation Eq. (S7) with the pore-edge amplitude λ_D/(2a), rather than on a direct asymptotic evaluation of the full equilibrium potential in Eq. (34). The SI text after Fig. S2 reports only a constant prefactor discrepancy of roughly 1.5 between the approximate and exact surface integrals, yet the simulations show an exponent change from 3/2 to 7/4 in the dimensionless current. A constant prefactor error cannot explain a 1/4-power discrepancy. The authors should either provide a derivation of the 7/4 exponent from Eq. (34) or identify explicitly which approximation in Eqs. (S3)–(S7) fails and why it changes the exponent.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption contains typos: 'curent' should be 'current', and 'mol m3' should be 'mol m^{-3}'.
  2. [Conclusions] The word 'electroyte' should be 'electrolyte'.
  3. [Supplementary Material, Sec. SIC] 'Duhkin length' should be 'Dukhin length'.
  4. [Reference 40] The publisher name 'Martinus Nihjoff' should be 'Martinus Nijhoff'.
  5. [Fig. S20 caption] The caption references Eq. (31) for the bulk contributions J(0) and I(0); these are defined in Eqs. (20) and (22), respectively, not Eq. (31).
  6. [Sec. IIIA] The text notes that the thin-EDL theoretical fluxes for Q and δJ are shifted from the simulations by roughly a constant factor. The source of this prefactor discrepancy (likely the step-function approximation) is not discussed; a brief explanation would improve the paper's transparency.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Thin-EDL electric-current 'scaling law' in Eq. (59) is an empirical power-law fit to the simulation data it is presented as predicting; the derived Eq. (43) exponent 1/2 is contradicted by the same simulations (exponent 1/4).

  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. IIIB and IIIC, Eq. (59); Sec. SII]
    "Figure 4(c) shows that the scaling relationship δĨ∝(λ_D/a)^{7/4}, which predicts that δI is proportional to (a/λ_D)^{1/4}, instead describes the scaling in the simulations for thin electric double layers. ... We fitted ˜Q (from the simulations) to (λ_D/a)^4, δ˜J to (λ_D/a)^{5/2} and δ˜I to (λ_D/a)^{7/4}."

    Eq. (43) derives δI∝(a/λ_D)^{1/2} from a step-function approximation to the charged-disk potential. The paper's own FEM data obey δĨ∝(λ_D/a)^{7/4} (Fig. 4c), i.e. δI∝(a/λ_D)^{1/4}; Sec. SII obtains this exponent by fitting the simulation data, and Eq. (59) then states δI∝(a/λ_D)^{1/4} as the scaling law, with Sec. IIIC attributing 'fractional power-law scaling' to the theory. The 1/4 law is thus a regression to the very δI data it is claimed to predict; the derived 1/2 law is contradicted and silently replaced by the fit.

full rationale

The thick-EDL scalings (Q∝a^3 σ^2 Δlnc, δJ∝a σ^2 Δlnc, δI∝a σ λ_D^{-1} Δlnc) and the thin-EDL Q and δJ scalings are parameter-free consequences of Eq. (34) and the perturbation expansion; the FEM comparison is an independent check, so those parts of the paper are not circular. The thin-EDL δI derivation (Eq. 43) is the only clearly circular element: its final published form in Eq. (59) uses an exponent (1/4) obtained by fitting the same simulation data that the law is claimed to explain, after the derived exponent (1/2) was shown to disagree with those data (Fig. 4c). The self-citation to Ref. 29 for the neutral-solute entry-flow solution and the analogous integrals is real prior work, not load-bearing in the electrolyte derivation, since the Laplace solution and FEM checks stand independently. The abstract's statement that 'these scaling laws accurately capture' FEM scaling is therefore accurate for Q and δJ but not for δI unless the empirical 1/4 law is counted as a theory law, which is the fitted-input circularity scored above.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 9 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The DH-regime scaling laws are parameter-free. The beyond-DH heuristic introduces fitted coefficients (α1, α2, the 7/4 exponent, and prefactors in Sec. SII) that are calibrated to the FEM simulations rather than derived.

free parameters (4)
  • δI thin-EDL exponent 7/4 (empirical) = 7/4
    Power-law fit to FEM simulation data for λ_D/a ≤ 0.1 in the Debye-Hückel regime (Fig. 4c); replaces the derived exponent 3/2 in δĨ ∝ (λ_D/a)^{3/2} and is used in Eq. (59) and Sec. SII.
  • α1 = 1/2
    Fitting parameter in Eq. (S30) for the beyond-Debye-Hückel δJ scaling; chosen as 1/2 to match simulation data in Fig. S5(a).
  • α2 = not determined (neglected for KCl)
    Introduced in Eq. (S31) for the δI diffusivity-difference contribution but neglected as negligibly small for KCl.
  • Prefactors for approximate thin-EDL flux expressions = π/128, 1/8, 1/2 (dimensionless)
    Slopes 0.0254, 0.121, 0.514 fitted to simulation data in Figs. S6-S7 and rounded to approximate the dimensionless fluxes in Eqs. (S32)-(S34).
assumptions (9)
  • domain assumption Continuum Poisson-Nernst-Planck-Stokes equations (Eqs. 1-4) describe dilute electrolyte transport.
    Standard continuum model; stated at start of Sec. II.
  • domain assumption Ion concentration obeys the Boltzmann form c(i) = cs exp(-Z_i e ψ/k_B T) even under a concentration gradient (Eq. 5).
    Assumed analogously to Ref. 29; verified against FEM in Figs. S12-S14 for |Z e ψ| up to 3 k_B T.
  • ad hoc to paper Perturbation expansion: to O(β), the gradient of c_s1 obeys Laplace's equation (Eq. 14) with negligible coupling to the equilibrium potential ψ0.
    Neglects the Z ψ0 term in Eq. (9); underlies the solution βĉ_s1 = (Δĉ/π) tan^{-1}ν (Eq. 15).
  • domain assumption Debye-Hückel approximation |Z e ψ| << k_B T in the main derivation (Eqs. 9, 16-17, 26).
    Standard linearization; the heuristic extension relaxes it via planar-channel results.
  • domain assumption Low Péclet number: advective solute transport neglected (Pe << 1), reducing the flux to Eq. (7).
    Verification in Fig. S11 that convective flux is small.
  • domain assumption Equilibrium potential for the charged infinitesimally thin disk is the DH solution Eq. (34).
    Standard result from Ref. 26; used to evaluate surface/volume integrals.
  • ad hoc to paper Thin-EDL step-function decay of the potential, Eq. (S7), with surface potential λ_D/a on the membrane and λ_D/(2a) at the pore edge.
    Used to derive exponents in Eqs. (38)-(41); agreement with exact integrals is approximate (Figs. S1-S2).
  • ad hoc to paper Heuristic extension: at fixed λ_D/a, replace (σλ_D/ϵϵ0)^2 by ln(1 + l_Du/(4λ_D)) from planar-channel diffusioosmosis (Eqs. 44-45).
    Assumed, not derived; validated by fits to FEM data in Figs. S4-S5.
  • standard math Reciprocal theorem Q = -(1/Δp) ∫ u_bar·F dV (Eq. 23) and Sampson pressure-driven velocity (Eq. 24).
    Standard hydrodynamic tools; cited from Refs. 26, 29, 40.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Scaling laws for concentration-gradient-driven electrolyte transport through a 2D membrane." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4TFUOPN7

@misc{pith2026241203781,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Scaling laws for concentration-gradient-driven electrolyte transport through a 2D membrane},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4TFUOPN7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.03781}
}
read the original abstract

Two-dimensional (2D) nanomaterials exhibit unique properties that are promising for diverse applications, including those relevant to concentration-gradient-driven transport of electrolyte solutions through porous membranes made from these materials, such as water desalination, osmotic power, and iontronics. Here we derive general equations, and determine scaling laws in the thick and thin electric-double-layer limits, that quantify the variation of the concentration-gradient-driven flow rate, solute flux and electric current with the pore radius, surface charge density and Debye screening length for the transport of a dilute electrolyte solution through a circular aperture in an infinitesimally thin planar membrane. We also determine scaling laws for the electric-field-driven flow rate in the thin electric-double-layer limit in the same geometry. We show that these scaling laws accurately capture the scaling relationships from finite-element numerical simulations within the Debye-H\"uckel regime, and extend the theory to obtain scaling laws in the thin electric-double-layer limit that hold even when the electric potential energy is large compared with the thermal energy. These scaling laws indicate unusual behavior for concentration-gradient-driven flow in a 2D membrane that is not seen in thicker membranes, which has broad implications for liquid transport through membranes whose thickness comparable to, or smaller than, their pore size.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.03781 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic of flow of a solution through a circular [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) Flow rate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) Flow rate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Dimensionless (a) flow rate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    author author Z. S. \ Siwy , author M. L. \ Bruening , \ and\ author S. Howorka ,\ title title Nanopores: synergy from DNA sequencing to industrial filtration – small holes with big impact , \ 10.1039/D2CS00894G journal journal Chem. Soc. Rev. \ volume 52 ,\ pages 1983--1994 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1039/d2cs00894g

  2. [2]

    Marbach \ and\ author L

    author author S. Marbach \ and\ author L. Bocquet ,\ title title Osmosis , from molecular insights to large-scale applications , \ 10.1039/C8CS00420J journal journal Chem. Soc. Rev. \ volume 48 ,\ pages 3102--3144 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1039/c8cs00420j

  3. [3]

    author author R. M. \ DuChanois , author C. J. \ Porter , author C. Violet , author R. Verduzco , \ and\ author M. Elimelech ,\ title title Membrane materials for selective ion separations at the water–energy nexus , \ https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202101312 journal journal Adv. Mater. \ volume 33 ,\ pages 2101312 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1002/adma.202101312

  4. [4]

    Zhang , author L

    author author Z. Zhang , author L. Wen , \ and\ author L. Jiang ,\ title title Nanofluidics for osmotic energy conversion , \ 10.1038/s41578-021-00300-4 journal journal Nat. Rev. Mater. \ volume 6 ,\ pages 622--639 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1038/s41578-021-00300-4

  5. [5]

    Siria , author M.-L

    author author A. Siria , author M.-L. \ Bocquet , \ and\ author L. Bocquet ,\ title title New avenues for the large-scale harvesting of blue energy , \ 10.1038/s41570-017-0091 journal journal Nat. Rev. Chem. \ volume 1 ,\ pages 0091 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1038/s41570-017-0091

  6. [7]

    author author N. R. \ Aluru , author F. Aydin , author M. Z. \ Bazant , author D. Blankschtein , author A. H. \ Brozena , author J. P. \ de Souza , author M. Elimelech , author S. Faucher , author J. T. \ Fourkas , author V. B. \ Koman , author M. Kuehne , author H. J. \ Kulik , author H.-K. \ Li , author Y. Li , author Z. Li , author A. Majumdar , author...

    work page

  7. [8]

    Pomerantseva , author F

    author author E. Pomerantseva , author F. Bonaccorso , author X. Feng , author Y. Cui , \ and\ author Y. Gogotsi ,\ title title Energy storage: The future enabled by nanomaterials , \ 10.1126/science.aan8285 journal journal Science \ volume 366 ,\ pages eaan8285 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1126/science.aan8285

  8. [9]

    \ Ying , author Z.-L

    author author Y.-L. \ Ying , author Z.-L. \ Hu , author S. Zhang , author Y. Qing , author A. Fragasso , author G. Maglia , author A. Meller , author H. Bayley , author C. Dekker , \ and\ author Y.-T. \ Long ,\ title title Nanopore-based technologies beyond DNA sequencing , \ 10.1038/s41565-022-01193-2 journal journal Nat. Nanotechnol. \ volume 17 ,\ page...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41565-022-01193-2

Show all 47 references
  1. [10]

    Robin , author N

    author author P. Robin , author N. Kavokine , \ and\ author L. Bocquet ,\ title title Modeling of emergent memory and voltage spiking in ionic transport through angstrom-scale slits , \ 10.1126/science.abf7923 journal journal Science \ volume 373 ,\ pages 687--691 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    doi

  2. [11]

    Robin \ and\ author L

    author author P. Robin \ and\ author L. Bocquet ,\ title title Nanofluidics at the crossroads , \ 10.1063/5.0143222 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 158 ,\ pages 160901 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    2023 doi

  3. [12]

    author author T. M. \ Kamsma , author J. Kim , author K. Kim , author W. Q. \ Boon , author C. Spitoni , author J. Park , \ and\ author R. van Roij ,\ title title Brain-inspired computing with fluidic iontronic nanochannels , \ 10.1073/pnas.2320242121 journal journal Proc. Nat...

    doi

  4. [13]

    Gkoupidenis , author Y

    author author P. Gkoupidenis , author Y. Zhang , author H. Kleeman , author H. Ling , author F. Santoro , author S. Fabiano , author A. Salleo , \ and\ author Y. van de Burgt ,\ title title Organic mixed conductors for bioinspired electronics , \ 10.1038/s41578-023-00622-5 jou...

    doi

  5. [14]

    Sahu \ and\ author M

    author author S. Sahu \ and\ author M. Zwolak ,\ title title Colloquium: Ionic phenomena in nanoscale pores through 2D materials , \ 10.1103/RevModPhys.91.021004 journal journal Rev. Mod. Phys. \ volume 91 ,\ pages 021004 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    doi

  6. [15]

    Zhang , author L

    author author S. Zhang , author L. Shen , author H. Deng , author Q. Liu , author X. You , author J. Yuan , author Z. Jiang , \ and\ author S. Zhang ,\ title title Ultrathin membranes for separations: A new era driven by advanced nanotechnology , \ https://doi.org/10.1002/adma...

    doi

  7. [16]

    Pakulski , author W

    author author D. Pakulski , author W. Czepa , author S. D. \ Buffa , author A. Ciesielski , \ and\ author P. Samorì ,\ title title Atom-thick membranes for water purification and blue energy harvesting , \ https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.201902394 journal journal Adv. Funct. Mate...

    doi

  8. [17]

    author author S. P. \ Surwade , author S. N. \ Smirnov , author I. V. \ Vlassiouk , author R. R. \ Unocic , author G. M. \ Veith , author S. Dai , \ and\ author S. M. \ Mahurin ,\ title title Water desalination using nanoporous single-layer graphene , \ 10.1038/nnano.2015.37 j...

    doi

  9. [18]

    Macha , author S

    author author M. Macha , author S. Marion , author V. V. R. \ Nandigana , \ and\ author A. Radenovic ,\ title title 2D materials as an emerging platform for nanopore-based power generation , \ 10.1038/s41578-019-0126-z journal journal Nat. Rev. Mater. \ volume 4 ,\ pages 588--...

    doi

  10. [19]

    Feng , author M

    author author J. Feng , author M. Graf , author K. Liu , author D. Ovchinnikov , author D. Dumcenco , author M. Heiranian , author V. Nandigana , author N. R. \ Aluru , author A. Kis , \ and\ author A. Radenovic ,\ title title Single-layer MoS 2 nanopores as nanopower generato...

    doi

  11. [20]

    author author B. M. \ Venkatesan \ and\ author R. Bashir ,\ title title Nanopore sensors for nucleic acid analysis , \ 10.1038/nnano.2011.129 journal journal Nat. Nanotechnol. \ volume 6 ,\ pages 615--624 ( year 2011 ) NoStop

    2011 doi

  12. [21]

    Robin , author T

    author author P. Robin , author T. Emmerich , author A. Ismail , author A. Niguès , author Y. You , author G.-H. \ Nam , author A. Keerthi , author A. Siria , author A. K. \ Geim , author B. Radha , \ and\ author L. Bocquet ,\ title title Long-term memory and synapse-like dyna...

    doi

  13. [22]

    Cheng , author Y

    author author B. Cheng , author Y. Zhong , author Y. Qiu , author S. Vaikuntanathan , \ and\ author J. Park ,\ title title Giant gateable osmotic power generation from a G oldilocks two-dimensional polymer , \ 10.1021/jacs.2c12853 journal journal J. Am. Chem. Soc. \ volume 145...

    doi

  14. [23]

    Wanunu , author W

    author author M. Wanunu , author W. Morrison , author Y. Rabin , author A. Y. \ Grosberg , \ and\ author A. Meller ,\ title title Electrostatic focusing of unlabelled DNA into nanoscale pores using a salt gradient , \ 10.1038/nnano.2009.379 journal journal Nat. Nanotechnol. \ ...

    doi

  15. [24]

    author author R. A. \ Sampson ,\ title title On S tokes's current function , \ 10.1098/rsta.1891.0012 journal journal Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A \ volume 182 ,\ pages 449--518 ( year 1891 ) NoStop

  16. [25]

    Heiranian , author A

    author author M. Heiranian , author A. Taqieddin , \ and\ author N. R. \ Aluru ,\ title title Revisiting S ampson's theory for hydrodynamic transport in ultrathin nanopores , \ 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.2.043153 journal journal Phys. Rev. Res. \ volume 2 ,\ pages 043153 ( year 2...

    doi

  17. [27]

    author author J. E. \ Hall ,\ title title Access resistance of a small circular pore. \ 10.1085/jgp.66.4.531 journal journal J. Gen. Physiol. \ volume 66 ,\ pages 531--532 ( year 1975 ) NoStop

    1975 doi

  18. [30]

    Siria , author P

    author author A. Siria , author P. Poncharal , author A.-L. \ Biance , author R. Fulcrand , author X. Blase , author S. T. \ Purcell , \ and\ author L. Bocquet ,\ title title Giant osmotic energy conversion measured in a single transmembrane boron nitride nanotube , \ 10.1038/...

    doi

  19. [31]

    Sisan \ and\ author S

    author author T. Sisan \ and\ author S. Lichter ,\ title title The end of nanochannels , \ 10.1007/s10404-011-0855-9 journal journal Microfluid. Nanofluid. \ volume 11 ,\ pages 787--791 ( year 2011 ) NoStop

    2011 doi

  20. [32]

    author author D. V. \ Melnikov , author Z. K. \ Hulings , \ and\ author M. E. \ Gracheva ,\ title title Electro-osmotic flow through nanopores in thin and ultrathin membranes , \ 10.1103/PhysRevE.95.063105 journal journal Phys. Rev. E \ volume 95 ,\ pages 063105 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    doi

  21. [35]

    Lavi \ and\ author Y

    author author O. Lavi \ and\ author Y. Green ,\ title title A theoretical characterization of osmotic power generation in nanofluidic systems , \ 10.1038/s43246-024-00559-4 journal journal Commun. Mater. \ volume 5 ,\ pages 124 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    doi

  22. [36]

    author author D. J. \ Bonthuis , author K. F. \ Rinne , author K. Falk , author C. N. \ Kaplan , author D. Horinek , author A. N. \ Berker , author L. Bocquet , \ and\ author R. R. \ Netz ,\ title title Theory and simulations of water flow through carbon nanotubes: prospects a...

    doi

  23. [37]

    author author R. F. \ Probstein ,\ @noop title Physicochemical Hydrodynamics: An Introduction ,\ edition 2nd \ ed.\ ( publisher Wiley-Interscience ,\ address Hoboken ,\ year 1994 ) NoStop

    1994

  24. [38]

    author author P. M. \ Morse \ and\ author H. Feshbach ,\ @noop title Methods of Theoretical Physics ,\ Vol. volume 1 \ ( publisher McGraw-Hill Book Company ,\ address New York ,\ year 1953 ) NoStop

    1953

  25. [39]

    author author P. M. \ Morse \ and\ author H. Feshbach ,\ @noop title Methods of Theoretical Physics ,\ Vol. volume 2 \ ( publisher McGraw-Hill Book Company ,\ address New York ,\ year 1953 ) NoStop

    1953

  26. [40]

    Happel \ and\ author H

    author author J. Happel \ and\ author H. Brenner ,\ @noop title Low Reynolds Number Hydrodynamics \ ( publisher Martinus Nihjoff Publishers ,\ address The Hague ,\ year 1983 ) NoStop

    1983

  27. [41]

    author author D. E. \ Gray ,\ @noop title American Institute of Physics Handbook \ ( publisher McGraw Hill, New York ,\ year 1972 ) NoStop

    1972

  28. [42]

    author author R. C. \ Rollings , author A. T. \ Kuan , \ and\ author J. A. \ Golovchenko ,\ title title Ion selectivity of graphene nanopores , \ 10.1038/ncomms11408 journal journal Nat. Commun. \ volume 7 ,\ pages 11408 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    doi

  29. [43]

    @noop note See https://www.comsol.com for COMSOL 4.3a NoStop

  30. [44]

    author author M. K. \ Borg , author D. A. \ Lockerby , author K. Ritos , \ and\ author J. M. \ Reese ,\ title title Multiscale simulation of water flow through laboratory-scale nanotube membranes , \ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2018.08.049 journal journal J. Membr. Sci. \...

    doi

  31. [45]

    Bocquet \ and\ author E

    author author L. Bocquet \ and\ author E. Charlaix ,\ title title Nanofluidics , from bulk to interfaces , \ 10.1039/B909366B journal journal Chem. Soc. Rev. \ volume 39 ,\ pages 1073--1095 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    2010 doi

  32. [46]

    Secchi , author A

    author author E. Secchi , author A. Nigu\`es , author L. Jubin , author A. Siria , \ and\ author L. Bocquet ,\ title title Scaling behavior for ionic transport and its fluctuations in individual carbon nanotubes , \ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.154501 journal journal Phys. Rev. Let...

    doi

  33. [47]

    Li , author A

    author author Z. Li , author A. T. \ Hall , author Y. Wang , author Y. Li , author D. O. \ Byrne , author L. R. \ Scammell , author R. R. \ Whitney , author F. I. \ Allen , author J. Cumings , \ and\ author A. Noy ,\ title title Ion transport and ultra-efficient osmotic power ...

    doi

  34. [48]

    author author D. C. \ Prieve ,\ https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8686(82)85022-7 journal journal Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. \ volume 16 ,\ pages 321 ( year 1982 ) NoStop

    1982 doi

  35. [49]

    author author J. C. \ Fair \ and\ author J. F. \ Osterle ,\ 10.1063/1.1675344 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 54 ,\ pages 3307 ( year 1971 ) NoStop

    1971 doi

  36. [50]

    Lee , author L

    author author C. Lee , author L. Joly , author A. Siria , author A.-L. \ Biance , author R. Fulcrand , \ and\ author L. Bocquet ,\ 10.1021/nl301412b journal journal Nano Lett. \ volume 12 ,\ pages 4037 ( year 2012 ) NoStop

    2012 doi

  37. [51]

    Mao , author J

    author author M. Mao , author J. D. \ Sherwood , \ and\ author S. Ghosal ,\ 10.1017/jfm.2014.214 journal journal J. Fluid. Mech. \ volume 749 ,\ pages 167 ( year 2014 ) NoStop

    2014 doi

  38. [52]

    author author D. J. \ Rankin , author L. Bocquet , \ and\ author D. M. \ Huang ,\ 10.1063/1.5108700 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 151 ,\ pages 044705 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    2019 doi

  39. [53]

    author author D. J. \ Rankin \ and\ author D. M. \ Huang ,\ 10.1021/acs.langmuir.6b00433 journal journal Langmuir \ volume 32 ,\ pages 3420 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    2016 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.