MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002993482 · doi:10.1021/ed5004756

Sweet Nanochemistry: A Fast, Reliable Alternative Synthesis of Yellow Colloidal Silver Nanoparticles Using Benign Reagents

2014· article· en· W2002993482 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Cooke, Dominique M. Hebert, Joel A. Kelly

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Education · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanotechnology research and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanochemistryReagentNanoparticleSilver nitrateColloidSilver nanoparticleNanotechnologyMaterials scienceChemical engineeringChemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work describes a convenient and reliable laboratory experiment in nanochemistry that is flexible and adaptable to a wide range of educational settings. The rapid preparation of yellow colloidal silver nanoparticles is achieved by glucose reduction of silver nitrate in the presence of starch and sodium citrate in gently boiling water, using either a hot plate or domestic microwave oven as the heat source. During the experiment, the students are encouraged to consider the role that each reagent plays in the synthesis. If desired, the experiment can be repeated with the systematic elimination of individual reagents to more rigorously investigate the importance of each in the optimized reaction conditions. The benign reagents used in the preparation are commonly found in most educational science storerooms. The optimized synthesis has proven to be quite reliable in student hands and may also appeal as an alternative method to instructors who already include the preparation of silver nanoparticles in their laboratory curriculum.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations34
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chemical EducationSame topicNanotechnology research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207