Optimising tip‐enhanced optical microscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We discuss the range of tip‐enhanced optical microscopies—namely mapping scattered light, fluorescence, Raman and coherent anti‐Stokes Raman scattering (CARS) signals on the scale of 10–20 nm. Through the use of measurements and finite‐element simulations, we explain what the optimum tip materials and sizes are and illumination wavelengths to use for all these modes of imaging. We also show that the observed limit of 50–100 µW of illumination power is due to a temperature rise of tens of degrees beneath the tip apex, and is most likely linked to the evaporation of water from the tip apex region. This has two important implications—that the tip is surrounded by water even when imaging ‘in air’, and that the tip and sample are both heated when imaging. With emphasis on Raman and CARS, we discuss how both these types of tip‐enhanced optical microscopy can be made about as fast as their diffraction‐limited counterparts. Copyright © 2009 Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada. Published by John Wiley & Sons. Ltd.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".