MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4225013411 · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv-2022-cpg6j

Programmed ripening of nanoparticles using a DNA template

2022· preprint· en· W4225013411 on OpenAlexafffund
Xin Luo, Jun Zhu, Felix J. Rizzuto, R. Bruce Lennox, Hanadi F. Sleiman

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsNanotechnologyNanodeviceNanoparticleDNA origamiMaterials scienceFolding (DSP implementation)PlasmonNanostructureOptoelectronicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nanoparticle (NP) ripening is a process where energetically favored larger 8 particles grow at the expense of smaller ones: while important in NP synthesis, it is often difficult to control during NP applications. Here, we unveil a new Contact-dependent, Localized Galvanic Ripening (CLGR) mechanism that enables precise control of NP ripening in solution. As neighboring silver NPs on a DNA origami template grow homogeneously to the point of making contact, the subtle size-dependent electrochemical potential differences of the NPs promote one silver shell to erode and redeposit locally onto the adjacent NP, leading to asymmetric structures. The unique on/off control through NP contact in CLGR presents a strategy to program the erosion and growth of specific NPs in a construct, which we exploit to synthesize customized heterogeneous core-shell NP structures with pre-designed plasmonic properties. CLGR is an essential phenomenon to consider for future nanodevice and nanophotonics designs.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemRxiv→Same topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques→French-language works237,207→