MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808832046 · doi:10.1002/adfm.201802759

Ultrabright Fluorescent and Lasing Microspheres from a Conjugated Polymer

2018· article· en· W2808832046 on OpenAlexafffund
Kirsty Gardner, Maryam Aghajamali, Sergey I. Vagin, Jennifer Pille, William Morrish, Jonathan G. C. Veinot, Bernhard Rieger, A. Meldrum

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Functional Materials · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsFluorescenceMaterials scienceConjugated systemLasing thresholdPolymerQuenching (fluorescence)Whispering-gallery waveNanotechnologyMicrospherePhotochemistryOptoelectronicsChemical engineeringOpticsChemistryResonatorComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Fluorescent microspheres are used for biomarkers, assay substrates, chemical diagnostics, flow cytometry, and biological imaging. These applications demand the highest fluorescence intensity achievable; however, concentration quenching limits the amount of dye that can be practically incorporated in conventional fluorescent microspheres. Conjugated polymers (CPs) can be less susceptible to concentration quenching, suggesting that they can be excellent candidates for a new class of light‐emitting microspheres. Due to their long‐chain‐conjugated backbone, however, CPs can be resistant to forming smoothly curved or spherical structures. Here, strongly fluorescent CP microspheres as large as 100 µm in diameter are synthesized. Whispering gallery modes (WGMs) appear in the fluorescence spectra, and the microspheres show clear evidence of lasing above a threshold pump intensity. These conjugated polymer beads are up to 50 times larger than CP microspheres obtained by other methods, and they exceed the emission intensity of conventional fluorescent microspheres by more than an order of magnitude.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.189 · 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.

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

Citations26
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Functional MaterialsSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207