MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380894752 · doi:10.53555/sfs.v9i1.763

Applications Of Nanomaterials In Improving The Traditional Diagnostic Approach

2023· article· en· W4380894752 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jaya Chaudhary, Anushka Tyagi, Shubham Bhatt, Anuj Pathak, N. G. Raghavendra Rao, Sonal Mittal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Survey in Fisheries Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKenan Institute for Engineering, Technology and Science
KeywordsNanotechnologyNanomaterialsComputer scienceIdentification (biology)Cancer therapyMedicineMaterials scienceCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The broad art of uses of nanomaterials or nanoparticles and nanodevices that are used in medical healthcare to diagnose and cure a variety of diseases has recently developed as a result of recent advancements in pharmaceutical research.So, in this review article, we will discuss the various art of nanomaterials that are used in various forms to develop various nano-devices and nano technologies that are widely used in medical applications, such as cantilevers, which are highly stable devices that are integrated into highly sensitive disease markers in diagnostic detectors and display reliable performance for a long time. These nanoparticles are also employed in the creation of various dosage forms that are used to either cure or diagnose diseases. These nanotechnologies are frequently used as sophisticated tools or gadgets in the early identification of cancer and atherosclerosis in the human body, where subsequent therapy such as nano-surgery may be used to cure them. These are well-known superior materials that are necessary for many fields due to their nano size.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.278
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.058 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Survey in Fisheries SciencesSame topicCancer Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207