MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994076084 · doi:10.1155/2008/727418

A New 3D Simulation Method for the Construction of Optical Phase Contrast Images of Gold Nanoparticle Clusters in Biological Cells

2008· article· en· W1994076084 on OpenAlexafffund
Stoyan Tanev, James Pond, P. Paddon, Valery V. Tuchin

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Optical Technologies · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDigital Holography and Microscopy
Canadian institutionsLumerical Solutions (Canada)Carleton University
FundersRussian Foundation for Basic ResearchWestern Canada Research Grid
KeywordsFinite-difference time-domain methodNanoparticleMaterials scienceContrast (vision)OpticsRefractive indexPhase contrast microscopyColloidal goldPhase (matter)Phase differenceNanotechnologyCluster (spacecraft)OptoelectronicsComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new 3D simulation method based on the finite‐difference time domain (FDTD) approach in combination with Fourier optic techniques is applied to the modeling of optical phase contrast microscope (OPCM) imaging of gold nanoparticles (NPs) in singe biological cells. We consider a realistic size 3D cell model at optical immersion conditions, that is, when the refractive index values of the cytoplasm and of the extracellular medium are equal. For the first time, an FDTD‐based OPCM model is applied to visualize the presence of a cluster of gold NPs in the cytoplasm at both resonant and nonresonant conditions. The results demonstrate the capability to model OPCM image enhancement by optically controlling the resonant properties of the NPs. Our research study extends the applicability of the FDTD modeling approach into a new biomedical optics research area.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations15
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Optical TechnologiesSame topicDigital Holography and MicroscopyFrench-language works237,207