MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079954914 · doi:10.1039/b810620g

Pitfalls and limitations in the practical use of Förster’s theory of resonance energy transfer

2008· article· en· W2079954914 on OpenAlexaff
Silvia E. Braslavsky, Eduard Fron, Hernán B. Rodríguez, Enrique San Román, Gregory D. Scholes, Gerd Schweitzer, Bernard Valeur, Jakob Wirz

Bibliographic record

VenuePhotochemical & Photobiological Sciences · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy transferResonance (particle physics)Förster resonance energy transferEnergy (signal processing)PhysicsEngineering physicsAtomic physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.073
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.162
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.386

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0730.162
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.017
Scholarly communication0.0070.018
Open science0.0120.010
Research integrity0.0070.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.008

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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.141 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations168
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venuePhotochemical & Photobiological SciencesSame topicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical StudiesFrench-language works237,207