Analysis of the Efficiency of Photothermal and Photodynamic Cancer Therapy via Nanogolds and Photosensitizers
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
Factors influencing the cancer therapy efficiency in both photothermal therapy (PTT) and photodynamic therapy (PDT) using nanogold particles and photosensitizers, respectively, are analyzed. In PTT, heat diffusion kinetics is used to calculate the temperature increase resulted from the nanogold absorption of light energy, whereas photochemical kinetics is used to find the efficacy of PDT, or the generation rate of reactive oxygen species. The critical factors of the PTT/PDT synergistic efficacy include: the concentration of the initiator (nanogold or photosensitizers) in the treated medium, the wavelength and energy of the light applied to the medium. Optimal parameters are calculated for maximum PDT efficacy. In PTT, diode laser (at 810 nm) is used to heat nanogolds (rod-shape or core-shell). In PDT, photosensitizers of riboflavin, 5-ALA, methylene blue and indocyanine green may be used with the associate light at wavelength of (365, 430 nm), (530-670 nm) and (780-850 nm) respectively. Both single light or dual light in infrared or visible wavelength are proposed to activate the photosensitizers or nanogolds. Optimization is required for maximum synergistic efficacy.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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