MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014694436 · doi:10.3390/cancers12040855

Green Chemistry Synthesis of Silver Nanoparticles and Their Potential Anticancer Effects

2020· review· en· W3014694436 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanoparticles: synthesis and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNational Research Foundation of KoreaNational Research Foundation
KeywordsSilver nanoparticleNanotechnologyNanobiotechnologyChemistryBiocompatible materialNanoparticleMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nanobiotechnology has grown rapidly and become an integral part of modern disease diagnosis and treatment. Biosynthesized silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) are a class of eco-friendly, cost-effective and biocompatible agents that have attracted attention for their possible biomedical and bioengineering applications. Like many other inorganic and organic nanoparticles, such as AuNPs, iron oxide and quantum dots, AgNPs have also been widely studied as components of advanced anticancer agents in order to better manage cancer in the clinic. AgNPs are typically produced by the action of reducing reagents on silver ions. In addition to numerous laboratory-based methods for reduction of silver ions, living organisms and natural products can be effective and superior source for synthesis of AgNPs precursors. Currently, plants, bacteria and fungi can afford biogenic AgNPs precursors with diverse geometries and surface properties. In this review, we summarized the recent progress and achievements in biogenic AgNPs synthesis and their potential uses as anticancer agents.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.246 · 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