Standoff and Point Detection of Thin Polymer Layers Using Microcantilever Photothermal Spectroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Standoff detection based on optical spectroscopy is an attractive method for identifying materials at a distance with very high molecular selectivity. Standoff spectroscopy can be exploited in demanding practical applications such as sorting plastics for recycling. Here, we demonstrate selective and sensitive standoff detection of polymer films using bi-material cantilever-based photothermal spectroscopy. We demonstrate that the selectivity of the technique is sufficient to discriminate various polymers. We also demonstrate in situ, point detection of thin layers of polymers deposited on bi-material cantilevers using photothermal spectroscopy. Comparison of the standoff spectra with those obtained by point detection, FTIR, and FTIR-ATR show relative broadening of peaks. Exposure of polymers to UV radiation (365 nm) reveal that the spectral peaks do not change with exposure time, but results in peak broadening with an overall increase in the background cantilever response. The sensitivity of the technique can be further improved by optimizing the thermal sensitivity of the bi-material cantilever and by increasing the number of photons impinging on the cantilever.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".