96-Well Plasmonic Sensing with Nanohole Arrays
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide A multiwell plasmonic reader was designed and validated for higher throughput analysis of biological interactions with a platform of the same size as standard 96-well plates. While the plasmonic sensor can be read with standard 96-well plate readers, a custom 96-well plate reader was designed to analyze nanohole arrays at high incident angles required for higher sensitivity. Gold nanohole arrays were manufactured on a 4 in. glass wafer using a photolithographic process. In comparison to single channel measurements with nanohole arrays fabricated with nanosphere lithography, the nanohole array sensors greatly enhanced the signal-to-noise ratio of the plasmonic signal and precision of the measurements with the multiwell plate system. As proof of concept, the detection of IgG in the low nanomolar range was achieved with the multiwell plate reader. The multiwell plasmonic plate reader was also applied to the screening of several prostate specific (PSA) antibodies for secondary detection of PSA and for the analysis of an anticancer drug through a competitive assay between methotrexate (MTX) and folic acid Au nanoparticle (FaNP) for human dihydrofolate reductase (hDHFR). The multiwell plasmonic reader based on nanohole array technology offers the rapid, versatile, sensitive, and simple high throughput detection of biomolecules.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it