MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407751482 · doi:10.55214/25768484.v9i2.4871

High Q Nanoplasmonic biosensor based on surface lattice resonances in the visible spectrum

2025· article· en· W4407751482 on OpenAlexafffund
Arslan Asim, Michael Čada, Yuan Ma, Alan Fine

Bibliographic record

VenueEdelweiss Applied Science and Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaResearch Nova ScotiaDalhousie University
KeywordsBiosensorVisible spectrumLattice (music)Materials scienceOptoelectronicsNanotechnologyOpticsCondensed matter physicsPhysicsMolecular physicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plasmonic nano-antennas are widely accepted as suitable platforms for biosensing tasks because Surface Plasmon Resonance (SPR) is very sensitive to changes in its environment. However, recent studies suggest that SPRs may have limited Quality (Q) factors, especially in comparison with their dielectric counterparts. Therefore, this paper attempts to innovate the design of plasmonic nano-antennas to achieve high Q factors through Surface Lattice Resonance (SLR) in the visible frequency band. This resonance is linked with plasmonic nanostructures organized in arrays. The structure consists of a metal-dielectric-metal configuration at the base with metallic nanopillars protruding upward. The nanophotonic device has been investigated for refractometric sensing applications. The maximum Q factor achieved as a result of this work is 245, which has been compared with contemporary plasmonic metasurface Q factors. The simulation framework has been implemented in COMSOL Multiphysics, which employs the Finite Element Method (FEM). Regression analysis has been used to formulate the calibration curve for the sensor. High Q factors provide better selectivity for biosensing 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEdelweiss Applied Science and TechnologySame topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniquesFrench-language works237,207