Side-by-Side Assembly of Gold Nanorods Reduces Ensemble-Averaged SERS Intensity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is generally expected that aggregates of metal nanoparticles are more efficient surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) probes than individual nanoparticles, due to the enhancement of the electric field in the interparticle gaps. We show that, for asymmetric nanoparticles, such as gold nanorods (NRs), this is not always the case: the plasmonic behavior of NRs depends on the mutual orientation of the NRs in the ensemble. We report the results of experimental studies and theoretical analysis of the optical properties of clusters of side-by-side assembled gold NRs. Ensemble-averaged SERS spectroscopy showed a reduction in SERS intensity. Comprehensive finite-difference time-domain simulations showed a reduction of electric field intensity as the number of NRs per cluster increased. This is due to destructive interference as the radial component of the surface plasmon modes of the NRs in the cluster interact with each other. The present work expands our understanding of the configuration-specific optical behavior of asymmetric gold nanoparticles. Furthermore, it offers guidance toward the “design rules” for the development of colloidal NR systems for sensing applications.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".