MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107253024 · doi:10.1039/c1cs15253j

Supramolecular DNA assembly

2011· review· en· W2107253024 on OpenAlexafffund
Christopher K. McLaughlin, Graham D. Hamblin, Hanadi F. Sleiman

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Society Reviews · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersQatar National Research FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsSupramolecular chemistryNanotechnologyToolboxDNADNA nanotechnologyBase pairComputer scienceChemistryMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The powerful self-assembly features of DNA make it a unique template to finely organize and control matter on the nanometre scale. While DNA alone offers a high degree of fidelity in its self-assembly, a new area of research termed 'supramolecular DNA assembly' has recently emerged. This field combines DNA building blocks with synthetic organic, inorganic and polymeric structures. It thus brings together the toolbox of supramolecular chemistry with the predictable and programmable nature of DNA. The result of this molecular partnership is a variety of hybrid architectures, that expand DNA assembly beyond the boundaries of Watson-Crick base pairing into new structural and functional properties. In this tutorial review we outline this emerging field of study, and describe recent research aiming to synergistically combine the properties inherent to DNA with those of a number of supramolecular scaffolds. This ultimately creates structures with numerous potential applications in materials science, catalysis and medicine.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.006

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations277
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Society ReviewsSame topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniquesFrench-language works237,207