Atomically flat symmetric elliptical nanohole arrays in a gold film for ultrasensitive refractive index sensing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Past works on refractive index sensing using nanohole arrays in metal films typically achieved a resolution of around 10(-4) to 10(-5) refractive index units (RIU), up to 10(-6) with complicated detection setups. This is an order of magnitude worse than commercial Kretschmann-based surface-plasmon resonance (SPR) sensors. Here, we demonstrate intensity-based bulk refractive index sensing in an aqueous environment with a resolution of 9.38 × 10(-8) refractive index units (RIU), showing for the first time comparable performance for nanohole SPR with Kretschmann-based SPR. This is achieved by the combination of three advances in the materials properties: (a) template stripping to achieve ultra-flat Au surfaces of ~0.2 nm roughness, (b) elliptical nanoholes to enhance transmission, and (c) a Cytop substrate to symmetrize the refractive index with the aqueous environment above the metal film. The simple optical microscope geometry and microfluidic integration used in this work is promising for multiplexed lab-on-chip analysis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".