MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2518238674 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b07134

Engineering of Host–Guest Interactions To Tune the Assembly of Plasmonic Nanoparticles

2016· article· en· W2518238674 on OpenAlexaff
Dezhi Tan, Siyu Tu, Yanqiong Yang, Sergiy Patskovsky, David Rioux, Michel Meunier

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSupramolecular Chemistry and Complexes
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlasmonSupramolecular chemistryNanotechnologyMaterials scienceNanoparticleNanostructurePlasmonic nanoparticlesSelf-assemblyOptoelectronicsChemistryMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Controlling the interaction between linking components and nanoobjects is expected to offer exciting new opportunities to induce tunable assembly and modulate the topology and properties of nanostructures. In this work, engineering the exclusive and inclusive host–guest interaction between cucurbit[ n ]urils and salts is demonstrated as a novel strategy to simultaneously realize tunable assembly of plasmonic nanoparticles (NPs) with controllable size and composition and manipulate the stability of the assemblies. As a proof of concept, one-dimensional nanochains of gold, silver, and their alloys with rigid subnanometer interparticle separation and widely tunable optical properties are generated. These exhibit strong dipole coupling between the plasmonic NPs, confirmed by experiments and theoretical simulations. This controllable assembly principle will lead to significant interest not only in supramolecular chemistry and the interactions between supramolecular and plasmonic NPs but also in interaction mechanisms and light management and light harvesting in advanced applications. It is also expected that our approach will be applicable to a wide range of NPs beyond plasmonic NPs with varied sizes and compositions.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry CSame topicSupramolecular Chemistry and ComplexesFrench-language works237,207