MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975941656 · doi:10.1155/2011/408151

Spontaneous Ag-Nanoparticle Growth at Single-Walled Carbon Nanotube Defect Sites: A Tool for<i>In Situ</i>Generation of SERS Substrate

2011· article· en· W1975941656 on OpenAlexafffund
Jason Maley, G. Schatte, Jianfeng Yang, Ramaswami Sammynaiken

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nanotechnology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon Nanotubes in Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanadian Cancer SocietyUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsCarbon nanotubeMaterials scienceRaman spectroscopyNanoparticleSubstrate (aquarium)NanotechnologyCarbon fibersChemical engineeringIn situComposite materialOpticsComposite numberOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Silver nanoparticles were spontaneously formed on pristine and oxidized single-wall nanotubes. Nanoparticles were observed on carbon nanotubes with AFM, and the presence of Ag nanoparticles were confirmed by ESR experiments. Raman spectroscopy of the Ag-treated carbon nanotubes had a 4–10X enhancement of intensity compared to untreated carbon nanotubes. Ag nanoparticles formed at defect sites on the CNT surface, where free electrons located at the defect sites reduced Ag+to Ag. A mechanism for the propagation of the nanoparticles is through a continual negative charge generation on the nanoparticle by electron transfer from doublet oxygen (O2−).

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)0.000
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 score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NanotechnologySame topicCarbon Nanotubes in CompositesFrench-language works237,207