MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328513059 · doi:10.1021/nn305677k

Full Spectroscopic Tip-Enhanced Raman Imaging of Single Nanotapes Formed from β-Amyloid(1–40) Peptide Fragments

2013· article· en· W2328513059 on OpenAlexaff
Melissa Paulite, Carolin Blum, Thomas Schmid, Lothar Opilik, Klaus Eyer, Gilbert C. Walker, Renato Zenobi

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Nano · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSupramolecular Self-Assembly in Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRaman spectroscopyPeptideAmyloid (mycology)Materials scienceAmyloid βBiophysicsNanotechnologyChemistryNuclear magnetic resonanceOpticsBiochemistryMedicinePathologyInorganic chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study demonstrates that spectral fingerprint patterns for a weakly scattering biological sample can be obtained reproducibly and reliably with tip-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (TERS) that correspond well with the conventional confocal Raman spectra collected for the bulk substance. These provided the basis for obtaining TERS images of individual self-assembled peptide nanotapes using an automated, objective procedure that correlate with the simultaneously obtained scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) images. TERS and STM images (64 × 64 pixels, 3 × 3 μm²) of peptide nanotapes are presented that rely on marker bands in the Raman fingerprint region. Full spectroscopic information in every pixel was obtained, allowing post-processing of data and identification of species of interest. Experimentally, the "gap-mode" TERS configuration was used with a solid metal (Ag) tip in feedback with a metal substrate (Au). Confocal Raman data of bulk nanotapes, TERS point measurements with longer acquisition time, atomic force microscopy images, and an infrared absorption spectrum of bulk nanotapes were recorded for comparison. It is shown that the unique combination of topographic and spectroscopic data that TERS imaging provides reveals differences between the STM and TERS images, for example, nanotapes that are only weakly visible in the STM images, a coverage of the surface with an unknown substance, and the identification of a patch as a protein assembly that could not be unambiguously assigned based on the STM image alone.

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations104
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS NanoSame topicSupramolecular Self-Assembly in MaterialsFrench-language works237,207