MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393253732 · doi:10.3390/inorganics12040096

Quantum Yield Enhancement of Carbon Quantum Dots Using Chemical-Free Precursors for Sensing Cr (VI) Ions

2024· article· en· W4393253732 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Karthiga K. Anpalagan, Hong Yin, Ivan Cole, Tian Zhang, Daniel Lai

Bibliographic record

VenueInorganics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon and Quantum Dots Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRMIT UniversityOntario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry
KeywordsCarbon quantum dotsQuantum yieldIonQuantum dotYield (engineering)Carbon fibersQuantum chemicalQuantumMaterials scienceNanotechnologyChemistryPhysicsQuantum mechanicsMoleculeOrganic chemistryMetallurgyComposite numberFluorescenceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantum yield illustrates the efficiency that a fluorophore converts the excitation light into fluorescence emission. The quantum yield of carbon quantum dots (CQDs) can be altered via precursors, fabrication conditions, chemical doping, and surface modifications. In this study, CQDs were first fabricated from whole-meal bread using a chemical-free hydrothermal route, and a low quantum yield (0.81%) was obtained. The combination of whole-meal bread, soybean flour, and lemon juice generated CQDs with almost four folds of enhancement in quantum yield. Detailed characterization suggested that these CQDs were subjected to more complete hydrothermal reactions and had zwitterionic surfaces. The CQDs could selectively detect Cr (VI) ions with a limit of detection (LOD) of 8 ppm. This study shows that the enhancement of the quantum yield of CQDs does not need chemicals, and it is achievable with food precursors.

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 score0.003

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations24
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInorganicsSame topicCarbon and Quantum Dots ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207