Rigorous Coupled‐Wave Analysis of Surface Plasmon Enhancement from Patterned Immobilization on Nanogratings
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We numerically evaluate the optical response of a Kretschmann surface plasmon resonance (SPR) biosensor featuring metallic nanogratings and patterned immobilization of surface receptors. Parameters are chosen such that the biosensor is operated near the generated bandgap of the surface plasmon dispersion. In this paper, we demonstrate that the sensitivity can be increased by concentrating the surface receptors and adsorbed analytes on regions where the field intensity is the greatest. Specifically, a surface presenting receptors on the grating mesas is shown to be twice as sensitive as that of a uniformly functionalized corrugated surface. The grating geometries are also studied; it is found that higher aspect ratio features show increased SPR response. The analysis differs from existing studies of enhanced SPR as the sensitivity improvement originating from the concentration and mapping of surface receptors to the plasmon field distribution is studied rather than the absorption or scattering enhancement effect of the nanostructures.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it