MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382724799 · doi:10.1039/d3ra03073c

User-friendly and ultra-stable all-inclusive gold tablets for cysteamine detection

2023· article· en· W4382724799 on OpenAlexafffund
Muna Al-Kassawneh, Zubi Sadiq, Sana Jahanshahi‐Anbuhi

Bibliographic record

VenueRSC Advances · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced Nanomaterials in Catalysis
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConcordia University
KeywordsCysteaminePullulanDetection limitChemistryColloidal goldCatalysisChromatographyNanoparticleMaterials scienceNuclear chemistryCombinatorial chemistryChemical engineeringNanotechnologyPolysaccharideOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

system. The presence of cysteamine in the system introduced two types of inhibition which were dependent on the cysteamine concentration. By determining Michaelis-Menten's kinetic parameters, we gained mechanistic insights into the catalytic inhibition process. Based on the catalytic inhibition capability of cysteamine, the limit of detection (LoD) was calculated to be 69.04 and 82.9 μM in buffer and human serum samples, respectively. Finally, real human serum samples were tested, demonstrating the applicability of the pAuNP-Tablet for real-world applications. The % R values in human serum samples were in the range of 91-105% with % RSD less than 2% for all replicas. The stability tests over 16 months revealed the ultra-stable properties of the pAuNP-Tablet. Overall, with a simple fabrication method and a novel employed technique, this study contributes to the advancement of tablet-based sensors and helps in cysteamine detection in clinical settings.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRSC AdvancesSame topicAdvanced Nanomaterials in CatalysisFrench-language works237,207