MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063429952 · doi:10.1021/jp801306x

Aqueous-Phase Room-Temperature Synthesis of Gold Nanoribbons: Soft Template Effect of a Gemini Surfactant

2008· article· en· W2063429952 on OpenAlexaff
Mandeep Singh Bakshi, Fred Possmayer, Nils O. Petersen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSurfactants and Colloidal Systems
Canadian institutionsNational Institute for NanotechnologyWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanorodMaterials scienceAqueous solutionX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyTransmission electron microscopyPhase (matter)Chemical engineeringAmmonium bromideSoft chemistryPulmonary surfactantDiffractionNanoparticleBromideColloidal goldNanotechnologyAqueous two-phase systemChemistryOpticsInorganic chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gold (Au) nanoribbons were synthesized in aqueous phase under ambient conditions by using dimethylene bis(tetradecyldimethyl-ammonium bromide) (14-2-14) as a capping agent as well as a soft template. A two steps seed-growth (S-G) method was used. The first step of S-G method mainly gave nanorods of high aspect ratio along with nanoparticles of other shapes, but the next step produced mainly fine Au nanoribbons of several micrometers long, 50–150 nm wide, and ≈5 nm thick. They were characterized by transmission electron microscopy, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, energy dispersive X-ray, and X-ray diffraction analysis. Isotropic liquid crystalline phase of 14-2-14 provided a soft template effect and derived nanorods of high aspect ratios toward nanoribbon formation at room temperature.

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 score0.003

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations88
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry CSame topicSurfactants and Colloidal SystemsFrench-language works237,207