Roadmap on nanoscale magnetic resonance imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The field of nanoscale magnetic resonance imaging (NanoMRI) was started 30 years ago. It was motivated by the desire to image single molecules and molecular assemblies, such as proteins and virus particles, with near-atomic spatial resolution and on a length scale of 100 nm. Over the years, the NanoMRI field has also expanded to include the goal of useful high-resolution nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy of molecules under ambient conditions, including samples up to the micron-scale. The realization of these goals requires the development of spin detection techniques that are many orders of magnitude more sensitive than conventional NMR and MRI, capable of detecting and controlling nanoscale ensembles of spins. Over the years, a number of different technical approaches to NanoMRI have emerged, each possessing a distinct set of capabilities for basic and applied areas of science. The goal of this roadmap article is to report the current state of the art in NanoMRI technologies, outline the areas where they are poised to have impact, identify the challenges that lie ahead, and propose methods to meet these challenges. This roadmap also shows how developments in NanoMRI techniques can lead to breakthroughs in emerging quantum science and technology applications.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.008 |
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".