MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201251161 · doi:10.1002/smll.202102683

Synthesis, Applications, and Prospects of Graphene Quantum Dots: A Comprehensive Review

2021· review· en· W3201251161 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSmall · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon and Quantum Dots Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsNanotechnologyQuantum dotGrapheneMaterials scienceGraphene quantum dotPhotoluminescencePhotothermal therapyNanomaterialsOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graphene quantum dot (GQD) is one of the youngest superstars of the carbon family. Since its emergence in 2008, GQD has attracted a great deal of attention due to its unique optoelectrical properties. Non-zero bandgap, the ability to accommodate functional groups and dopants, excellent dispersibility, highly tunable properties, and biocompatibility are among the most important characteristics of GQDs. To date, GQDs have displayed significant momentum in numerous fields such as energy devices, catalysis, sensing, photodynamic and photothermal therapy, drug delivery, and bioimaging. As this field is rapidly evolving, there is a strong need to identify the emerging challenges of GQDs in recent advances, mainly because some novel applications and numerous innovations on the ease of synthesis of GQDs are not systematically reviewed in earlier studies. This feature article provides a comparative and balanced discussion of recent advances in synthesis, properties, and applications of GQDs. Besides, current challenges and future prospects of these emerging carbon-based nanomaterials are also highlighted. The outlook provided in this review points out that the future of GQD research is boundless, particularly if upcoming studies focus on the ease of purification and eco-friendly synthesis along with improving the photoluminescence quantum yield and production yield of GQDs.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.265 · 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