Assessment of 4-(Dimethylamino)pyridine as a Capping Agent for Gold Nanoparticles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gold nanoparticles stabilized with 4-(dimethylamino)pyridine (DMAP) were prepared by ligand exchange and phase transfer (toluene/water) of functionalized gold nanoparticles. DMAP-protected gold nanoparticles are water-soluble, positively charged, and fairly monodisperse (6.2 +/- 0.9 nm). To understand the scope of this interesting system, the details of the binding of DMAP to gold nanoparticles were investigated. The adsorption of DMAP onto gold surfaces was studied by electrochemistry and surface plasmon resonance. It is concluded that of the three most likely binding modes, the one involving the pyridine nitrogen binding to the gold surface, as suggested previously (Gittins, D. I.; Caruso, F. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2001, 40, 3001), is consistent with experimental data. Other 4-substituted pyridines were also assessed as capping agents. The solubility in toluene and basicity of the incoming ligand, as well as the ability to form charged nanoparticles, determine whether ligand exchange and subsequent phase transfer of the nanoparticles occur. The solubility and stability of the DMAP-protected gold nanoparticles were studied as a function of pH using UV-visible spectroscopy and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). These nanoparticles are soluble and stable over a wide pH range (5.0-12.8). It was found that excess DMAP is necessary for both the preparation and the stability of the DMAP-protected gold nanoparticles.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".