MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2523900262 · doi:10.11159/icnfa16.126

Effect of Gradual Heating of Gold Nanoparticle Multilayers on Polymer Substrates on the Characteristics of their LSPR Bands

2016· article· en· W2523900262 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Michael J. Fanous, Simona Bǎdilescu, Muthukumaran Packirisamy

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on New Technologies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGold and Silver Nanoparticles Synthesis and Applications
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceNanoparticleColloidal goldPolymerOptoelectronicsNanotechnologyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polymer materials have become increasingly useful for photonic sensing applications.Their consistency and optical properties make them highly desirable for sensing possibilities.Bio-molecules, such as proteins, can be attached to a polymer substrate using a thin layer of gold nanoparticle.Gold nanoparticles (GNP) hold unique localized plasmon resonance (LSPR) properties, which are affected by their structure, shape, distribution, and their degree of penetration into the surrounding medium.As well, the dielectric properties of the medium influence LSPR responses.These characteristics, in turn, depend on the thermal history of the sample, that is, the extent and duration of heating of the polymer-GNP systems.In this work, we examine the specific effects of gradually increasing temperature through incremental heating on the LSPR response of GNP on various polymers, including cyclic olefin copolymer (COC), poly (methyl methacrylate) (PMMA), poly (dimethyl siloxane) (PDMS), SU-8, polycarbonate (PC) and polystyrene (PS).GNP on polymers manifested a shift in the LSPR peak response from 7 nm to 34 nm on average, and an important change in absorbance as well.These results will help enhance the sensing performance of microphotonic sensors by improving the shape of the LSPR band and selecting the ideal polymer material for specific applications.The information will also benefit other applications, including cell culture and biomolecular separation in a microfluidic environment.Furthermore, the findings herein may be employed towards developing a unidirectional temperature sensor.

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 score0.003

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on New TechnologiesSame topicGold and Silver Nanoparticles Synthesis and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207