MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024156372 · doi:10.1021/ja509018g

A DNA-Directed Light-Harvesting/Reaction Center System

2014· article· en· W2024156372 on OpenAlexaff
Palash Dutta, Symon Levenberg, Andrey Loskutov, Daniel Jun, Rafael G. Saer, J. Thomas Beatty, Su Lin, Yan Liu, Neal W. Woodbury, Hao Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Chemical Society · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotosynthetic reaction centreRhodobacter sphaeroidesChemistryConjugated systemOptoelectronicsNanostructurePhotochemistryDNAMoleculeAntenna (radio)Electron transferNanotechnologyPhotosynthesisPhysicsPolymerMaterials scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A structurally and compositionally well-defined and spectrally tunable artificial light-harvesting system has been constructed in which multiple organic dyes attached to a three-arm-DNA nanostructure serve as an antenna conjugated to a photosynthetic reaction center isolated from Rhodobacter sphaeroides 2.4.1. The light energy absorbed by the dye molecules is transferred to the reaction center, where charge separation takes place. The average number of DNA three-arm junctions per reaction center was tuned from 0.75 to 2.35. This DNA-templated multichromophore system serves as a modular light-harvesting antenna that is capable of being optimized for its spectral properties, energy transfer efficiency, and photostability, allowing one to adjust both the size and spectrum of the resulting structures. This may serve as a useful test bed for developing nanostructured photonic systems.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations101
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Chemical SocietySame topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniquesFrench-language works237,207