Sensing nanoparticles using a double nanohole optical trap
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 use a double nanohole (DNH) optical trap to quantify the size and concentration of nanoparticles in solution. The time to trap shows a linear dependence with nanosphere size and a -2/3 power dependence with nanosphere concentration, which is in agreement with simple microfluidic considerations. The DNH approach has size-specificity on the order of a few nanometers, which was used to selectively quantify particles of a single size within a heterogeneous solution. By looking at individual trapping events, it is in principle possible to extend this approach to the ultimate limit of a single particle concentration, while also being able to operate at high concentrations in the same configuration. In addition, the DNH trap allows us to hold onto individual particles and thereby study constituents of a heterogeneous mixture. By repeating the trapping measurements on spherical particles of different refractive index, we found that the transmission step that indicates trapping scales empirically with the Clausius-Mossotti factor. This approach may be applied to several sensing applications, such as in the study of virus populations, where concentrations vary over many orders of magnitude.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
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