MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2937882893 · doi:10.1021/acsnano.9b02772

Nanoscience and Nanotechnology at the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology

2019· editorial· en· W2937882893 on OpenAlexaff
Seungbum Hong, WooChul Jung, Hyuck Mo Lee, Paul S. Weiss, Il‐Doo Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Nano · 2019
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicAdvanced Photocatalysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeb of scienceCitationLibrary scienceWorld Wide WebNanotechnologyComputer scienceMEDLINEChemistryMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ADVERTISEMENT RETURN TO ISSUEEditorialNEXTNanoscience and Nanotechnology at the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and TechnologySeungbum HongSeungbum HongKAISTMore by Seungbum Honghttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-2667-1983, WooChul JungWooChul JungKAISTMore by WooChul Junghttp://orcid.org/0000-0001-5266-3795, Hyuck Mo LeeHyuck Mo LeeKAISTMore by Hyuck Mo Leehttp://orcid.org/0000-0003-4556-6692, Paul S. WeissPaul S. WeissMore by Paul S. Weisshttp://orcid.org/0000-0001-5527-6248, and Il-Doo Kim*Il-Doo KimDepartment of Materials Science and Engineering, KAIST*Email: [email protected]More by Il-Doo Kimhttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-9970-2218Cite this: ACS Nano 2019, 13, 4, 3741–3745Publication Date (Web):April 23, 2019Publication History Published online23 April 2019Published inissue 23 April 2019https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.9b02772Copyright © 2019 American Chemical SocietyRIGHTS & PERMISSIONSArticle Views5411Altmetric-Citations6LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICSArticle Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated. Share Add toView InAdd Full Text with ReferenceAdd Description ExportRISCitationCitation and abstractCitation and referencesMore Options Share onFacebookTwitterWechatLinked InReddit PDF (11 MB) Get e-AlertsSUBJECTS:Materials,Nanoscience,Nanotechnology,Sensors,Students Get e-Alerts

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.568
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.013
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS NanoSame topicAdvanced Photocatalysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207