Plasma nanofabrication and nanomaterials safety
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fast advances in nanotechnology have raised increasing concerns related to the safety of nanomaterials when exposed to humans, animals and the environment. However, despite several years of research, the nanomaterials safety field is still in its infancy owing to the complexities of structural and surface properties of these nanomaterials and organism-specific responses to them. Recently, plasma-based technology has been demonstrated as a versatile and effective way for nanofabrication, yet its health and environment-benign nature has not been widely recognized. Here we address the environmental and occupational health and safety effects of various zero- and one-dimensional nanomaterials and elaborate the advantages of using plasmas as a safe nanofabrication tool. These advantages include but are not limited to the production of substrate-bound nanomaterials, the isolation of humans from harmful nanomaterials, and the effective reforming of toxic and flammable gases. It is concluded that plasma nanofabrication can minimize the hazards in the workplace and represents a safe way for future nanofabrication technologies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".