Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42023489›Full record

ArticleFaraday discussions2026

When is nanoconfined water different from interfacial water?

Xavier R Advincula, Christoph Schran, Angelos Michaelides

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Faraday discussions, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Xavier R AdvinculaYusuf Hamied Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, Lensfield Road, Cambridge, CB2 1EW, UK. xr223@cam.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-5343-0456
Christoph SchranCavendish Laboratory, Department of Physics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB3 0HE, UK. cs2121@cam.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4595-5073
Angelos MichaelidesYusuf Hamied Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, Lensfield Road, Cambridge, CB2 1EW, UK. xr223@cam.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9169-169X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Water behaves very differently at surfaces and under extreme confinement, but the boundary between these two regimes has remained unclear. Despite evidence that interfacial effects persist under sub-nanometre confinement, the molecular-scale behaviour and its evolution with slit width remain unclear. Here, we use machine-learning molecular dynamics with first-principles accuracy to probe water at graphene surfaces across slit widths ranging from the open-interface limit to angstrom-scale confinement. We find that water undergoes a sharp structural transition: when three or more water layers fit between the walls, the structure of the graphene-water interface is effectively indistinguishable from that in an open system, with density layering, hydrogen bonding, and orientational ordering retaining interfacial character. Below this threshold, however, angstrom-scale confinement strongly reorganises the liquid, producing enhanced ordering, a restructured hydrogen-bond network, and modified orientational motifs. These results establish a molecular-level picture that clearly separates interfacial behaviour from genuine nanoconfinement and provide guidance for predicting and controlling the structure of water in nanoscale solid-liquid environments.

Identifiers

PMID42023489
PMCPMC13103939

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.