MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070029688 · doi:10.3109/07388551.2010.550568

Green approach for nanoparticle biosynthesis by fungi: current trends and applications

2011· review· en· W2070029688 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Reviews in Biotechnology · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanoparticles: synthesis and applications
Canadian institutionsInstitut de Recherche et de Développement en AgroenvironnementInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanotechnologyBiochemical engineeringNanoparticleNanomaterialsComputer scienceBiotechnologyMaterials scienceBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the green approach of nanoparticle synthesis by biological entities has been gaining great interest over various other physico-chemical methods, which are laden with many disadvantages. The important challenging issues in current nanotechnology include the development of reliable experimental techniques for the synthesis of nanoparticles of different compositions and sizes along with high monodispersity. Biological systems offer unique promising features to tailor nanomaterials with predefined properties. Fungi are the favorite choice of microorganisms due to the wide variety of advantages they offer over bacteria, yeast, actinomycetes, plants, and other physico-chemical techniques. The use of microorganisms for the deliberate synthesis of nanoparticles is a fairly new and exciting area of research with considerable potential for further development. This review describes an overview of the current green approaches for the synthesis of nanoparticles with particular emphasis on fungi, which are gaining worldwide popularity as nano-factories for the green synthesis of 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.279 · 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