Tuning the color of high-karat gold in Au-TiO2 nanoparticle composites all the way to black
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For centuries, artisans have harnessed gold nanoparticles to imbue their creations with the vibrant hues that captivate the eye through interactions with visible light. In modern times, these distinct optoelectronic characteristics have pivoted toward the forefront of innovative technologies, finding their niche in advanced applications from solar energy to medicine, overshadowing their artistic heritage. This investigation reimagines the utilitarian scope of gold by innovating the optical characteristics of gold-titania nanostructures. This allows for an expanded palette of colors that retain the value of the precious metal. We employ nanostructured TiO 2 in a high-pressure-high-temperature sintering technique that stabilizes Au nanoparticles, thwarting coalescence, and Oswald ripening. Further refinement is possible by engineering TiO 2 color centers through the introduction of oxygen vacancies and Ti 3+ ions, which aid in creating an opulent high-karat black-gold, but preserve the mechanical attributes essential to the integrity and function of the final product.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".