ReviewNPJ metamaterials2026
Co-design of programmable material systems.
Review in NPJ metamaterials, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Advances in manufacturing, stimuli-responsive materials, and actuation technologies have fueled the development of programmable material systems (PMS) that can change their functional states in response to external stimuli. This functional switch is instrumental for applications that demand adaptability and robustness under dynamic environments such as wearable electronics, haptic interfaces, and soft robots. In principle, achieving an interesting degree of programmability in material systems is a challenging design problem as it requires careful consideration of geometry, material, stimulus, and process amidst dynamic environments. This task becomes even more challenging when compounded by multifunctionality requirements, multiphysics modeling, coupling among the design entities, and resource-intensive performance evaluation. In practice, prevailing approaches often heuristically fix some entities or decouple their interactions, which significantly limits achievable performance and generalizability of the design approach. Motivated by this gap between promise and practice, we present a co-design formalism that highlights shared design considerations across prior works and categorizes design strategies for managing complexity. With the proposed lens, we reveal common threads in existing design approaches, identify opportunities and open research questions for co-design to achieve better performance and generalization. Through this perspective article, we aim to lay a design foundation for boosting progress in this emerging interdisciplinary field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.