MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204530943 · doi:10.3390/chemosensors9100275

Current State of Laser-Induced Fluorescence Spectroscopy for Designing Biochemical Sensors

2021· article· en· W3204530943 on OpenAlexafffund
Adam Thomas Taylor, Edward P. C. Lai

Bibliographic record

VenueChemosensors · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiosensors and Analytical Detection
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDetectorFluorescenceNanotechnologyLaserLaser-induced fluorescenceComputer scienceBiochemical engineeringMaterials scienceEngineeringOpticsPhysicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laser-induced fluorescence (LIF) has been a valuable analytical technique since the 1970s that has only been made more useful through advances in other scientific fields such as biochemistry. Moreover, advances in laser and detector technology have seen a decrease in LIF detector costs and an increase in their ease of use. These changes have allowed for LIF technology to be widely adopted for various sensor designs in combination with advanced instruments. With advances in biochemistry necessitating the detection of complex metabolites, labelling with fluorescent chemical reagents may be necessary to improve detection sensitivity. Furthermore, advances made in fluorescent labeling technologies have allowed for the use of LIF in the detection of nanoparticles as well as for imaging techniques using nanoparticles as signal amplifiers. This technology has become invaluable in the detection of environmental pollutants, monitoring of biological metabolites, biological imaging, and cancer diagnosis, making it one of the most valuable analytical science techniques currently available.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.780

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.247
Teacher spread0.231 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations42
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemosensorsSame topicBiosensors and Analytical DetectionFrench-language works237,207