MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130301086 · doi:10.1002/sia.3431

Bi <sub>n</sub> <sup>+</sup> cluster ion sources for investigation of a covalently immobilized mixed film composed of oligonucleotides and poly(2‐hydroxyethyl methacrylate) brushes

2010· article· en· W2130301086 on OpenAlexafffund
April K. Y. Wong, R. N. S. Sodhi, Ulrich J. Krull

Bibliographic record

VenueSurface and Interface Analysis · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIon-surface interactions and analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOligonucleotideMethacrylateIonCovalent bondSelectivityPolymer chemistryChemistryMaterials scienceNucleic acidSecondary ion mass spectrometryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Cluster (spacecraft)PolymerCopolymerOrganic chemistryDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The ability of Bi n + cluster ion sources to provide information about the physical structure of an integrated film composed of oligonucleotides and non‐nucleic acid oligomers of poly(2‐hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (PHEMA) has been explored using static time‐of‐flight (ToF) SIMS (ToF‐SIMS). Fragment intensities from PHEMA and oligonucleotides were compared. Negative ion spectra indicated that the Bi 5 + source provided details that were either not apparent or at much reduced sensitivity when using Bi 3 + and Bi + sources. The Bi 3 + ion source provided higher secondary ion intensities for positive ion fragments, and more than 200‐fold selectivity for ionization of oligonucleotide in comparison to PHEMA when in mixture, even though the oligonucleotides were not immobilized as a coating superimposed on PHEMA. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 score0.002

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSurface and Interface AnalysisSame topicIon-surface interactions and analysisFrench-language works237,207