MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970046902 · doi:10.1021/ac991137e

Mapping Interfacial Chemistry Induced Variations in Protein Adsorption with Scanning Force Microscopy

2000· article· en· W1970046902 on OpenAlexafffund
Truong C. Ta, Mark T. McDermott

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Chemistry · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicForce Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMonolayerChemistryAdsorptionCarboxylateAtomic force microscopyMicroscopyInfrared spectroscopyProtein adsorptionScanning Force MicroscopyCrystallographyChemical engineeringNanotechnologyStereochemistryOrganic chemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we demonstrate the sensitivity of scanning force microscopy (SFM), operated in friction force mode, to adsorbed protein conformation or orientation. We employ patterned films of methyl- and carboxylate-terminated alkanethiolate monolayers on gold as substrates for protein adsorption to observe the effect of each functional group in the same image. Infrared spectroscopic and SFM studies of bovine fibrinogen (BFG) adsorption to single-component monolayers indicate that complete films of BFG that are stable to imaging are formed at each functional group. After adsorption of BFG to a patterned monolayer, we observe a contrast in friction images due to differences in adsorbed BFG conformation or orientation induced by each functional group. We also observe frictional contrast in films of other proteins adsorbed on patterned monolayers. These observations lead to the conclusion that SFM-measured friction is sensitive to adsorbed protein state.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytical ChemistrySame topicForce Microscopy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207