Study of plasmonic properties of gold nanoparticles of different shapes with emphasis on gold nanopyramids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a study of gold nanopyramids and their optical properties. A comparison with the extinction properties of gold nanorods and nanocubes is also undertaken. The Finite Difference Time Domain (FDTD) method is used for the study of optical properties. The nanopyramids display a dual plasmon resonance when excited with a perpendicularly polarized signal due to the excitation of dipole and quadrupole modes. The quadrupole modes are not strongly affected by changing the height of the nanopyramids whereas the dipole mode is redshifted with increasing the height of the nanopyramids. The quadrupole mode could be of interest in some applications where the shorter wavelength resonance is desired. The quadrupole and dipole modes are located at 620 nm and 765 nm respectively. This band is used for both intensity and wavelength modulated biosensors. Furthermore, the electric field is enhanced in the case of the nanopyramids which is considered as another advantage in sensing and surface enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) applications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".