Methods used for HSP determination:

1) IEA - Integral extinction and automated addition method as published in Süß et al., Adv Powder Technol, 2018, 29, 1550-1561
2) IEA+ - Integral extinction and automated addition method with additional considerations as published in Anwar et al., Part. Part. Syst. Charact.2023, 40, 2300050
3) PSDC - Particle size distributions and combinatorics based method as published in Anwar et al., Nanoscale, 2022,14, 13593-13607. Methods using other methods such as stability trajectories in addition to combinatorics are mentioned by name
4) Probe liquid selection done according to Amin et al., ChemCatChem2024, 16, e202301393. Materials using this step are marked with * symbol next to method of HSP determination. HSP determined without the probe lquid selection method have the probe liquid list chosen based on experience or selected randomly.

QDs - Quantum dots
NPs - Nanoparticles
SPs - Supraparticles

Material Disperse interactions δD (MPa1/2) Polar interactions δP (MPa1/2) Hydrogen bonding δH (MPa1/2) Sphere radius (MPa1/2) Method used for determination Publication DOI Total combinations possible Combinations chosen for HSP Outliers
Carbon black (Printex-L) 17.2 8.5 11.6 6.1 IEA Süß et al., (2018) Link - - -
Silica 15.5 22.7 23.4 19.9 IEA Stauch et al., (2018) Link - - -
Zinc oxide QDs 13.3 17.7 14.6 11.4 IEA Süß et al., (2019) Link - - -
SiNx 15.8 7.2 13.6 3.0 Stability trajectories + Combinatorics Bapat et al., (2021) Link 2 1 of 2 1
Titania (Solvothermal synthesis) 14.9 ± 1.8 17.0 ± 2.2 11.2 ± 3.5 6.8 ± 3.0 PSDC Anwar et al., (2022) Link 1012 14 of 16 2
Carbon black (Vulkan XC72R) 17.0 10.7 12.3 6.7 IEA+ Anwar et al., (2023) Link

-

- -
Carbon black (Vulkan XC72R) 17.4 ± 0.8 11.7 ± 2.5 10.9 ± 2.4 4.5 ± 2.2 PSDC Anwar et al., (2023) Link 8177 16 of 16 0
Silicon/carbon nanocomposite 19.1 10.8 5.2 7.5 IEA+ Anwar et al., (2023) Link - - -
Silicon/carbon nanocomposite 19.1 ± 0.1 13.0 ± 2.2 5.5 ± 0.05 5.7 ± 1.8 PSDC Anwar et al., (2023) Link 1012 2 of 4 2
Iron oxide NPs (PAA functionalized) 18.5 ± 1.5 11.0 ± 2.1 9.4 ± 3.9 6.0 ± 3.7 PSDC Hammad et al., (2024) Link 1012 5 of 8 3
Iron oxide SPs (PAA functionalized) 18.6 ± 0.4 14.4 ± 1.5 10.6 ± 4.2 6.6 ± 4.0 PSDC Hammad et al., (2024) Link 1012 6 of 8 2
Lanthanum Strontium Cobalt oxide (La0.8Sr0.2CoO3) 16.5 ± 0.5 13.1 ± 1.9 14.2 ± 0.7 8.1 ± 1.3 Stability trajectories + combinatorics Gerschel et al., (2024) Link 1012 8 of 8 0
NIckel iron oxide (NiFe2O4) 16.2 ± 0.8 12.2 ± 1.1 12.4 ± 1.1 7.4 ± 0.8 Stability trajectories + combinatorics Gerschel et al., (2024) Link 1012 8 of 8 0
Carbon black (C65) 17.1 10.7 12.3 6.3 IEA+ Amin et al., (2024) Link - - -
Carbon black (Ketjen Black 300) 17.1 10.7 12.3 6.3 IEA+ Amin et al., (2024) Link - - -
Carbon black (Ketjen Black 600) 16.7 9.2 11.6 6.1 IEA+ Amin et al., (2024) Link - - -
Nickel cobalt oxide 15.2 12.3 13.6 6.9 IEA+ Vinaykumar et al., (2025) Link - - -

Titania (P25)

18.7 ± 0.2 14.6 ± 1.9 6.1 ± 1.3 5.0 ± 1.4 PSDC Anwar et al., (2025) Link 121 4 of 4 0
Titania (Erbium doped, sol gel synthesis) 15.8 ± 0.3 8.6 ± 0.6 12.4 ± 0.7 5.9 ± 0.6 PSDC Anwar et al., (2025) Link 121 2 of 2 0
Titania (spray flame synthesis) 18.0 ± 0.0 14.6 ± 0.5 10.0 ± 0.9 2.3 ± 0.5 PSDC Anwar et al., (2025) Link 121 4 of 4 0
Titania-graphene composite (10% graphene) 18.6 ± 1.2 17.4 ± 0.2 6.6 ± 1.2 4.3 ± 0.9 PSDC Anwar et al., (2025) Link 121 2 of 2 0
Titania-graphene composite (20% graphene) 18.1 ± 0.8 15.8 ± 1.8 5.8 ± 0.9 5.3 ± 1.6 PSDC Anwar et al., (2025) Link 121 4 of 4 0
Titania-graphene composite (30% graphene) 18.4 ± 1.0 17.4 ± 0.2 6.5 ± 1.0 4.3 ± 0.9 PSDC Anwar et al., (2025) Link 121 2 of 2 0
Lanthanum manganese oxide 16.5 10.7 15.0 5.1 IEA+ Toplak et al., (2026) Link - - -
Lanthanum iron oxide 16.5 10.7 15.0 5.1 IEA+ Toplak et al., (2026) Link - - -
Lanthanum cobalt oxide 17.1 12.6 14.9 6.6 IEA+ Toplak et al., (2026) Link - - -
Graphene (gas phase synthesized) 17.8 12.8 9.1 2.3 IEA+ Grebener et al., (2026) Link - - -