MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011689351 · doi:10.1021/ac4034664

Advances in Surface Plasmon Resonance Imaging Enable Quantitative Tracking of Nanoscale Changes in Thickness and Roughness

2014· article· en· W2011689351 on OpenAlexaff
Adam Raegen, Kyle Reiter, Alexander Dion, Anthony J. Clarke, Jacek Lipkowski, John Dutcher

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Chemistry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanofabrication and Lithography Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface plasmon resonanceChemistryNanoscopic scaleSurface finishSurface roughnessNanometreOpticsPerpendicularPolymerNanotechnologyComposite materialMaterials scienceNanoparticleGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To date, detailed studies of the thickness of coatings using surface plasmon resonance have been limited to samples that are very uniform in thickness, and this technique has not been applied quantitatively to samples that are inherently rough or undergo instabilities with time. Our manuscript describes a significant improvement to surface plasmon resonance imaging (SPRi) that allows this sensitive technique to be used for quantitative tracking of the thickness and roughness of surface coatings that are rough on the scale of tens of nanometers. We tested this approach by studying samples with an idealized, one-dimensional roughness: patterned channels in a thin polymer film. We find that a novel analysis of the SPRi data collected with the plane of incidence parallel to the patterned channels allows the determination of the thickness profile of the channels in the polymer film, which is in agreement with that measured using atomic force microscopy. We have further validated our approach by performing SPRi measurements perpendicular to the patterned channels, for which the measured SPR curve agrees well with the single SPR curve calculated using the average thickness determined from the thickness profile as determined using AFM. We applied this analysis technique to track the average thickness and RMS roughness of cellulose microfibrils upon exposure to cellulolytic enzymes, providing quantitative determinations of the times of action of the enzymes that are of direct interest to the cellulosic ethanol industry.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
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

Citations8
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytical ChemistrySame topicNanofabrication and Lithography TechniquesFrench-language works237,207