MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999658695 · doi:10.3390/ma6125821

Recent Progress in Advanced Nanobiological Materials for Energy and Environmental Applications

2013· review· en· W1999658695 on OpenAlexaff
Hyo‐Jick Choi, Carlo Montemagno

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicAlgal biology and biofuel production
Canadian institutionsNational Institute for NanotechnologyUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolymersomeNanotechnologyArtificial cellBiomimeticsBiochemical engineeringBiocompatible materialMaterials scienceComputer sciencePolymerMembraneEngineeringChemistryCopolymerAmphiphile

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

cellular life processes are based on the fabrication of artificial organelles using protein-incorporated polymersomes and the creation of bioreactors. This concept of an artificial organelle originates from the first synthesis of poly(siloxane)-poly(alkyloxazoline) block copolymers three decades ago and the first demonstration of protein activity in the polymer membrane a decade ago. The increased value of biomimetic polymers results from many research efforts to find new applications such as functionally active membranes and a biochemical-producing polymersome. At the same time, foam research has advanced to the point that biomolecules can be efficiently produced in the aqueous channels of foam. Ongoing research includes replication of complex biological processes, such as an artificial Calvin cycle for application in biofuel and specialty chemical production, and carbon dioxide sequestration. We believe that the development of optimally designed biomimetic polymers and stable/biocompatible bioreactors would contribute to the realization of the benefits of biomimetic systems. Thus, this paper seeks to review previous research efforts, examine current knowledge/key technical parameters, and identify technical challenges ahead.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations19
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicAlgal biology and biofuel productionFrench-language works237,207