MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156368223 · doi:10.1002/adma.200601332

Perfecting Imperfection—Designer Defects in Colloidal Photonic Crystals

2006· article· en· W2156368223 on OpenAlexafffund
André C. Arsenault, Friederike Fleischhaker, Georg von Freymann, Vladimir Kitaev, Hernán Míguez, Agustín Mihi, Nicolas Tétreault, E. Vekris, Ian Manners, Stewart Aitchison, Doug D. Perovic, Geoffrey A. Ozin

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Materials · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhotonic Crystals and Applications
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftFundación Ramón Areces
KeywordsMaterials scienceNanotechnologyPhotonic crystalPlanarBiomoleculeColloidal crystalPhotonicsCharacterization (materials science)ColloidOptoelectronicsStructural colorationComputer scienceChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Current progress in the exciting and burgeoning field of functional defects in colloidal photonic crystals (CPCs) is reported. After a brief introduction into the importance and nature of defects in CPCs the state‐of‐the‐art in fabricating point, line, and planar defects is described. Measurement and characterization techniques as well as the corresponding theory are discussed. Besides normal, passive defects, the recent development of reversibly tunable defects adds important functionality. In particular, the addition of chemical functionality is demonstrated to open a path to a wide range of color readout devices for ultrasensitive optical detection of biomolecules and pharmaceuticals.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations85
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced MaterialsSame topicPhotonic Crystals and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207