MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158411231 · doi:10.3390/radiation1020012

LiF Nanoparticles Enhance Targeted Degradation of Organic Material under Low Dose X-ray Irradiation

2021· article· en· W3158411231 on OpenAlexaff
Felix Maye, Ayse Turak

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicLuminescence and Fluorescent Materials
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersFP7 People: Marie-Curie ActionsUniversität Stuttgart
KeywordsIrradiationMaterials scienceIonizing radiationNanoparticleDegradation (telecommunications)RadiationX-rayOptoelectronicsRadiochemistryNanotechnologyOpticsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The targeted irradiation of structures by X-rays has seen application in a variety of fields. Herein, the use of 5–10 nm LiF nanoparticles to locally enhance the degradation of an organic thin film, diindenoperylene, under hard X-ray irradiation, at relatively low ionizing radiation doses, is shown. X-ray reflectivity analysis indicated that the film thickness increased 12.04 Å in air and 11.34 Å in a helium atmosphere, under a radiation dose of ∼65 J/cm2 for 3 h illumination with a bi-layer structure that contained submonolayer coverage of thermally evaporated LiF. This was accompanied by significant modification of the surface topography for the organic film, which initially formed large flat islands. Accelerated aging experiments suggested that localized heating was not a major mechanism for the observed changes, suggesting a photochemical mechanism due to the formation of reactive species from LiF under irradiation. As LiF has a tendency to form active defects under radiation across the energy spectrum, this could could open a new direction to explore the efficacy of LiF or similar optically active materials that form electrically active defects under irradiation in various applications that could benefit from enhanced activity, such as radiography or targeted X-ray irradiation therapies.

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 score0.040
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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiationSame topicLuminescence and Fluorescent MaterialsFrench-language works237,207