MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212798646 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1329525/v1

Surface Plasmon Resonance Based Refractive Index Biosensor: A External Sensing Approach

2022· preprint· en· W4212798646 on OpenAlexaff
Sumaiya Akhtar Mitu, Mst. Nargis Aktar, Sobhy M. Ibrahim, Kawsar Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersKing Saud University
KeywordsSurface plasmon resonanceBiosensorRefractive indexMaterials scienceSurface plasmonLocalized surface plasmonOpticsResonance (particle physics)Index (typography)OptoelectronicsPlasmonNanotechnologyPhysicsComputer scienceNanoparticleAtomic physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A surface plasmon resonance (SPR) based sensor founded on Photonic crystal fiber (PCF) is suggested and numerically analyzed in the manuscript. The refractive index (RI) detecting SPR based sensor has the ability to identify the analyte range from 1.33 to 1.4. Pure silica is used as a base material and it has high RI value than the analyte RI. Furthermore, an analyte layer and chemically stable gold (Au) layer are also placed at the sensor design. The simulations are done based on the Finite Element Method (FEM). Here, the scaled-down approach has the necessity to increase phase matching point within the core mode and surface plasmon polariton (SPP) mode which tends to the sensor to reach high sensitivity response. At the intersect point of core and SPP mode, the loss curve shows a maximum peak value. The suggested sensor shows the highest wavelength sensitivity (WS) response of 35,943.22 nm/RIU, amplitude sensitivity (AS) response of 2321.36 RIU−1, sensor resolution of 9.04×10−6 RIU, and Figure of merit (FOM) value of 600. It is noted that all the optical parameters show better performance analysis. Furthermore, an external sensing approach provides more fabrication feasibility which marks the offered sensor more suitable for practical experimentation. Besides, the investigated sensor provides the maximum and rapid sensing performance that will be helpful for microfluidic analyte detection, detection of biomolecules, medical diagnostics, virus detection, security, and bio-imaging.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicAdvanced Fiber Optic SensorsFrench-language works237,207