Welcome to <i>ACS Sensors</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Welcome to ACS Sensors W elcome to ACS Sensors.We are really excited about having a society journal dedicated to all aspects of chemical and biological sensors.We will work tirelessly to help make ACS Sensors the journal many in the community want it to bea journal that not only publishes the very best conceptual and applied advances in sensing, but also represents both the academic and commercial sectors, and publishes reviews and opinion pieces that help advance this exciting and expanding field.To achieve these goals we need your help as authors and referees.As authors, we invite you to submit your best sensor-related work, and as referees, we need you to help make the good papers we receive even better.So, what types of papers are we looking to publish?Well, really any innovative work on sensors that monitor chemical or biological species or processes.These papers could be exciting conceptual advances in sensing, or powerful application papers that use existing sensors in new ways or to provide new knowledge.In all cases, we would ideally like the sensors to be challenged in complex samples, that experimental error analysis is provided, that the analytical information is compared to an established method where possible, and thatabove all else the work is innovative and interesting.We emphasize these points as they are the sorts of elements of a paper we feel are part of most of the best sensing contributions.When it comes to topics related to chemical and biological sensing, we are completely nonprescriptive.We are interested in papers on biosensors, chemical sensors, gas sensors, intracellular sensors, single molecule sensors, cell-based sensors, sensor arrays, and microfluidic devices for sensing.We are also hoping to receive papers on new materials and transducers for sensing that are broadly applicable, new ways of fabricating sensors of commercial relevance, sensor validation, and sensor networks.The types of papers that will allow ACS Sensors to cover such a breadth in sensing will not only be original research published as full articles and letters, but also reviews and more opinion pieces such as perspective articles.The lack of prescription with regard to subject matter is because the chemical and biological sensing field is advancing at incredible speed in many different directions.We see this in the very first issue where we have a review on biosensors developed using two-dimensional molybdenum disulfide, 1 while our cover paper is on paper-based fluidics.2 The first paper to receive ACS Editors' Choice status is on an intracellular sensor for zinc, 3 and the first paper from one of us relates to addressing the challenge of alkaline pH values found in environmental samples on potentiometric anion analysis.4 The first issue also includes papers focusing on applications as diverse as environmental analysis, food monitoring, biomedical, and even nanoparticle detection.5 Less well represented in the first issue are papers on biosensors, cell-based sensors, or single-molecule devices, but this will certainly be addressed with time.Your editorial team covers this broad range of sensing expertise.Shana has a background in electrochemical biosensors for clinical analysis as well as intracellular sensors; Eric's expertise is in chemical sensors for environmental and
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.489 | 0.409 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".