MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042024782 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1017962108

High sensitivity nanoparticle detection using optical microcavities

2011· article· en· W2042024782 on OpenAlexaff
Tao Lű, Hansuek Lee, Tong Chen, Steven Herchak, Ji-Hun Kim, Scott E. Fraser, Richard C. Flagan, Kerry J. Vahala

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterferometryNanoparticleRADIUSSensitivity (control systems)SIGNAL (programming language)Materials scienceOpticsParticle (ecology)Backscatter (email)Noise (video)OptoelectronicsMolecular physicsPhysicsNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We demonstrate a highly sensitive nanoparticle and virus detection method by using a thermal-stabilized reference interferometer in conjunction with an ultrahigh-Q microcavity. Sensitivity is sufficient to resolve shifts caused by binding of individual nanobeads in solution down to a record radius of 12.5 nm, a size approaching that of single protein molecules. A histogram of wavelength shift versus nanoparticle radius shows that particle size can be inferred from shift maxima. Additionally, the signal-to-noise ratio for detection of Influenza A virus is enhanced to 381 from the previously reported 31. The method does not use feedback stabilization of the probe laser. It is also observed that the conjunction of particle-induced backscatter and optical-path-induced shifts can be used to enhance detection signal-to-noise.

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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations308
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207