Through the Eyes of Creators: Observing Artificial Molecular Motors
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inspired by molecular motors in biology, there has been significant progress in building artificial molecular motors, using a number of quite distinct approaches. As the constructs become more sophisticated, there is also an increasing need to directly observe the motion of artificial motors at the nanoscale and to characterize their performance. Here, we review the most used methods that tackle those tasks. We aim to help experimentalists with an overview of the available tools used for different types of synthetic motors and to choose the method most suited for the size of a motor and the desired measurements, such as the generated force or distances in the moving system. Furthermore, for many envisioned applications of synthetic motors, it will be a requirement to guide and control directed motions. We therefore also provide a perspective on how motors can be observed on structures that allow for directional guidance, such as nanowires and microchannels. Thus, this Review facilitates the future research on synthetic molecular motors, where observations at a single-motor level and a detailed characterization of motion will promote applications.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it