MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2131972847 · doi:10.1109/icsens.2010.5690405

Modeling sensing mechanisms in carbon nanotube biosensors

2010· article· en· W2131972847 on OpenAlexafffund
G. B. Abadir, Konrad Walus, D.L. Pulfrey

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon Nanotubes in Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCarbon nanotubeConductanceAb initioChemical physicsDensity functional theoryAdsorptionMolecular dynamicsMaterials scienceNanotechnologyBiosensorCarbon fibersAb initio quantum chemistry methodsComputational chemistryMolecular biophysicsChemistryMoleculePhysicsPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistryCondensed matter physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have applied extensive ab initio density functional theory coupled with non-equilibrium Green's function (DFT/NEGF) and molecular dynamics simulations to study the details of physical interactions between carbon nanotubes and amino acids in order to understand the underlying mechanisms that contribute to changes in electronic transport of carbon nanotubes in a two-terminal configuration. It was found that Coulombic interactions with charged amino acids produced the only significant changes in IV characteristics and that those changes are bias dependent. The results show that displacements in atomic coordinates resulting from the adsorption of short peptides onto the CNT surface do not produce any significant change in conductance. The results also demonstrate that semi metallic carbon nanotubes can be used to detect charged species.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 topicCarbon Nanotubes in Composites→French-language works237,207→