MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400048131 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.4c01903

SERS Monitoring Hot Electron Generation in Plasmonic Silver Nanocube Monolayers

2024· article· en· W4400048131 on OpenAlexafffund
Jimmy Baril, Anatoli Ianoul

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGold and Silver Nanoparticles Synthesis and Applications
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPlasmonMonolayerNanotechnologyHot electronMaterials scienceOptoelectronicsElectronPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optimizing hot electron generation is important for increasing the efficiency of light harvesting in photovoltaics and photocatalysis. Surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) is a valuable tool to assess the extent of such electron production as it enables monitoring of the hot electron-driven chemical reactions. In this work, SERS was used to compare the hot electrons generated when two localized surface plasmon resonance (LSPR) modes present in plasmonic substrates prepared using silver nanocubes (AgNC) were excited: the dipole LSPR mode and the coupled LSPR mode. The silver plasmonic monolayers were prepared on polystyrene-coated glass slides at various nanoparticle densities and therefore varying intensities of the dipolar and coupled resonances. Dehalogenation of bromothiophenol and chlorothiophenol was used as a hot electron sensitive reaction. The dependence of the reaction yield on the excitation wavelength, power, and extent of plasmonic coupling was assessed by monitoring SERS spectral evolution. It was found that excitation of the dipole mode resulted in a hot electron yield higher than that of the coupling mode for the substrates used. Additionally, it was found that the hot electron yield for the AgNC substrates decreased as the coupling mode strength increased. This work shows the need for a better control over the plasmonic substrate fabrication and characterization methods to allow improved hot electron generation from the coupled modes.

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 score0.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry CSame topicGold and Silver Nanoparticles Synthesis and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207