<i>In situ</i> evaluation of plasmonic enhancement of gold tips for plasmon-enhanced imaging techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plasmonic nanoantennas are at the core of various optical near-field scanning techniques such as tip-enhanced Raman spectroscopy as they provide the amplification and confinement of the electromagnetic field, which ultimately provides sensitivity and spatial resolution. With a cornucopia of different fabrication methods available, the actual performance of a nanoantenna is often only assessed by whether or not near-field imaging is possible, implying the complete alignment and landing procedure of the scanning probe. We present a semi-quantitative approach to assess the plasmonic enhancement of gold tips via localized surface plasmon resonance (LSPR) enhancement of intrinsic gold photoluminescence without the need for interaction with the sample. As the intensity of the plasmon at the apex decreases, a significant change in the shape of the tip signal spectrum is observed, reflecting itself as a decrease in the R2 value (fit quality) for numerical fitting with a Lorentzian, which also provides an approximation for the LSPR wavelength. Our findings suggest that the potential of a tip to perform well as an optical near field antenna may already be assessed in an early stage of the experiment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".