Electrochemical Analysis of Ultrathin Polythiolsiloxane Films for Surface Biomodification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability of different crosslinkers to crosslink nanometer thick films of the polymer poly(mercaptopropyl)methylsiloxane (PMPMS), thus stabilizing these films on solid supports, was investigated. The four crosslinkers included 1,11‐bismaleimidotriethyleneglycol (BM(PEG) 3 ), tris‐(2‐maleimidoethyl)amine (TMEA), bismaleimidohexane (BMH), and 1,1′‐(methylenedi‐4,1‐phenylene) bismaleimide (BMDPM). PMPMS films treated with the four crosslinkers were compared in the effectiveness of achieved crosslinking, continuity and stability of the films to rearrangement at elevated temperatures, and modification with single‐stranded DNA. The results of electrochemical analyses show that more hydrophilic crosslinkers had difficulty reacting fully with PMPMS thiols, even in these nanometer thin layers. This observation highlights the critical importance of selecting crosslinkers that are chemically compatible. Optimal selection of crosslinker yielded films in which the polymer film was largely incapable of rearranging, even at elevated temperatures, yielding reproducible and stable layers. These results validate use of these supports for applications such as monitoring thermal denaturation of immobilized DNA duplexes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".