Analysis of Nanoparticles Characteristics with TOPSIS for Their Manufacture Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study focuses on the comparative analysis of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs) characteristics with the TOPSIS method. The prediction of the characteristics of SPIONs is required for better manufacturing of these nanoparticles. Although the characteristics of these nanoparticles have been investigated, no research has been done on their comparison in order to determine which one of their surface functionalities would be more appropriate for their diverse applications. The objective of this study was to analyze the characteristics of SPIONs without or with surface charge with a prediction model and TOPSIS in order to determine the best nanoparticles. Moreover, the effect of inappropriate consideration of their cost criterion on their ranks was explored with the modified TOPSIS. This analysis showed that the characteristics of SPIONs such as antibiofilm activity, hemocompatibility, activity with hydrogen peroxide, rheological properties, and the labour of their chemical synthesis could affect their ranking. Neutral SPIONs, negatively charged SPIONs, and positively charged SPIONs were ranked as the first, second, and third candidates, respectively. However, the improvement of the activity of positively charged SPIONs with hydrogen peroxide showed an increase to 0.3 instead of 0.2, which resulted in a better rank of these nanoparticles in comparison with that of the same nanoparticles in the first analysis series. One of the advantages of this study was to determine the impact of the characteristics of SPIONs on their ranking for their manufacturing. The other advantage was getting the information for further comparative study of these nanoparticles with the others. The results of this work can be used in manufacturing engineering and materials science.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".