MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Computational characterization of plasma effects in ultrafast laser irradiation of spherical gold nanostructures for photothermal therapy

2016· article· en· W2263267465 on OpenAlexafffund
Ali Hatef, Behafarid Darvish, Adam Burke, Adrien Dagallier, Michel Meunier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics D Applied Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser-Ablation Synthesis of Nanoparticles
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalNipissing University
FundersNipissing University
KeywordsPhotothermal therapyPlasmaMaterials scienceNanoparticleFluenceLaserPulsed laser depositionUltrashort pulseIrradiationThermoelastic dampingNanotechnologyOptoelectronicsOpticsThin filmThermal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ultrashort pulsed lasers can provide high peak intensity with low pulse fluence. This makes them an ideal choice in photothermal therapy and applications where damage to the surrounding material needs to be minimized. Depending on the peak intensity, the ultrashort pulsed laser’s interaction with matter can lead to plasma formation through nonlinear effects such as multiphoton and impact electron excitation. The capability of the spherical gold nanoparticles, as the most employed nanoparticle so far for photothermal therapy, to enhance and strongly localize the incident laser field leads to plasma formation around the particles at even lower pulse fluences. Under certain circumstances, during the pulse duration, this plasma can absorb more energy than the nanoparticle itself. Consequently, the absorbed energy by the generated plasma can act as an energy source for different phenomena such as the evolution of the temperature distribution, thermoelastic stress generation, and stress-induced bubble formation. In this paper, we study the plasma-mediated interaction of a 45 fs pulsed laser with two types of spherical gold nanoparticles in water: solid nanoparticle and core–shell (silica–gold) nanoparticle. We use a numerical framework based on the finite element method (FEM) to compare energy deposition profiles in these nanoparticles and in their surrounding plasma, by focusing on the impact of the nanoparticle size and the laser fluence. Our calculations show that the maximum energy deposition in plasma occurs in core–shell nanoparticles with a diameter of 130 nm and the ratio of core to shell radius of 0.8 and in solid nanoparticles with a diameter of 170 nm.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics D Applied PhysicsSame topicLaser-Ablation Synthesis of NanoparticlesFrench-language works237,207