MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2327315751 · doi:10.1021/am200515q

Stabilization of Neodymium Oxide Nanoparticles via Soft Adsorption of Charged Polymers

2011· article· en· W2327315751 on OpenAlexaff
Annie Dorris, Clémence Sicard, Mark C. Chen, A. B. McDonald, Christopher J. Barrett

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Applied Materials & Interfaces · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNear-Field Optical Microscopy
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolyelectrolyteMaterials scienceNanoparticleSurface chargePolymerOxideAdsorptionChemical engineeringParticle (ecology)AbsorbanceNeodymiumPolyelectrolyte adsorptionChemical physicsNanotechnologyPhysical chemistryChemistryChromatographyOpticsComposite materialLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, two synthetic polyelectrolytes, PSS and PAH, are employed as strong adsorbed surfactants to disperse and stabilize neodymium oxide nanoparticles. The acid-base equilibria of the oxide surfaces of the particles were investigated under different pH conditions in the absence and presence of polyelectrolytes, to optimize particle stabilization through enhancement of the effective repulsive surface charges. Surface charge amplification of a 3:5 ratio was achieved to permit improved particle transparency of 100-fold in visible wavelengths in neutral and acidic pH regimes, and a stable 10-fold surface charge amplification was achieved under basic pH conditions. The potential of polyelectrolytes as stabilizing agents for neodymium oxide NPs in large-scale particle physics experiments requiring extremely high optical transparency over long path length is evaluated based on optical absorbance and particle stability.

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations22
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Applied Materials & InterfacesSame topicNear-Field Optical MicroscopyFrench-language works237,207