MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309811842 · doi:10.1149/ma2022-02361294mtgabs

(Invited) Carbon Dots – Unlocking Optical Properties for Applications in Imaging, Sensing and Energy

2022· article· en· W4309811842 on OpenAlexaff
Rafik Naccache

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon and Quantum Dots Applications
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanotechnologyQuantum dotNanomaterialsCarbon quantum dotsMaterials scienceCarbon fibersPhotoluminescencePassivationEnvironmentally friendlyFluorescenceOptoelectronicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, nanomaterials (defined as materials < 100 nm in a single dimension) have garnered a significant interest for the development of novel applications in the physical and life sciences. One such class of nanomaterials are carbon dots, a relatively new member in the carbon allotrope family, which possesses versatile optical properties rendering it attractive for sensing, catalysis, bioimaging and drug delivery applications, to name a few. Their ultra-compact size, low cytotoxicity, resistance to photo-bleaching/blinking and tunable photoluminescence, combined with simple, environmentally-friendly and low-cost synthesis, makes them ideal candidates for study. We synthesize carbon dots via bottom-up synthesis methods, with simple organic precursors (e.g. citric acid) as the carbon source. We passivate the surface of our carbon dots to achieve high fluorescence quantum yields. Moreover, our work focuses on trying to elucidate the fluorescence mechanisms in carbon dots, which remain a subject of debate. Finally, we exploit their optical properties in order to design multifunctional materials as chiral, pH or temperature sensors, as well as heterogeneous catalysts for green energy 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.

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)0.001
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 score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicCarbon and Quantum Dots ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207